2014/04/18

“On The Call” – ESPN / Wimbledon Conference Call with Chris Evert and John McEnroe

Chris-Evert

(June 18, 2013) ESPN tennis analysts Chris Evert and John McEnroe spoke with media about Wimbledon, which starts Monday, June 24, exclusively across ESPN platformes.  Much of the conversation centered on the dominance of Serena Williams, the Big Four of men’s tennis, the emerging new generation of U.S. players and the magic that is Wimbledon…both saying if they could only win one major, it would be at the All England Lawn Tennis Club.  Highlights:

 

Q.  Think like a coach for me and explain how you would tell a player to try to beat Serena Williams on grass.  Where, if anywhere, do you see a weakness or vulnerability in her game?

JOHN McENROE:  I don’t see a weakness.  I see someone who perhaps is more comfortable at the baseline.  I thought they did a pretty darn good job at the French at the net.  What I would tell her is she can do pretty much anything, but she may have a little bit more difficulty in handling sort of off-speed, junk-ball type stuff where it might entice her to go for too much.  Her serve is the best serve in the history of women’s tennis by far.  Her presence is very intimidating.  But I would not try to match power with her, I would try to do anything possible, if they’re capable of that, to throw off her rhythm.

 

CHRIS EVERT:  Well, it’s interesting you say that because I was thinking about that.  Even on the red clay, I kind of had my feelings about how to play her.  But on the grass, it’s a little different.  First of all, I would hope I would have a big serve, my protege, would have a big serve, or you’re going to lose 0-0.  You have to have a big serve working.  Anytime Maria Sharapova had success against Serena it’s because she’s been serving big and consistently.  Your serve better be working that day.

 

The other thing, when I’m returning serve, I wouldn’t stand back that far.  I would actually chip the returns back.  I would really just chip the returns back.  At this point Serena, you know, she beats everybody in the world from the baseline, but nobody’s really tried bringing her in, forcing her to come in.  As good a volleyer as she is because of doubles, she’s still not as comfortable at the net as she is on the baseline.  I would take off some of the pace.  John McEnroe would have had a great game to play against her because he could just chip it back and be prepared for the next shot because she’s going to come in, be prepared for the next shot.  If she comes into the net, if she misses it, hits a winner, you have to accept it.

 

I just think you really can’t hit with her from the baseline.  You’ve got to either hit short angles, dropshots, chip, do something to throw her timing off.  Once she gets in a rhythm, she’s deadly.  But you got to have a big serve.  You have to be able to hold your serve most of the time.  You can’t be just slugging balls with her.  That’s been proven a thousand million times.  It doesn’t work.  If Maria is holding serve, once the point starts, she has about as good a chance as any.  On the grass, it’s going to be more difficult for Maria because of the movement.  You just have to try to throw her timing off.

 

Q. Would you be surprised if she didn’t win this title? 

CHRIS EVERT:  Yeah, I would be surprised.  Trust me, nothing is set in stone.  It’s a two-week tournament.  I don’t care what anybody says, when you get to be at the 28, 30, 31 age, you played 10 years, 12 years, 15 years on the tour, there are days that it isn’t there.  There are days your body is not working.  There’s days you would rather not be out there, you’d rather be in bed, not get out of bed.  Roger Federer, I think we’ve seen a couple days like that with him.  I know Serena has been out of the game, she’s pumped up, and that’s probably not going to happen.  Sometimes it does happen to players that have played a lot.

 

JOHN McENROE:  I would be very surprised.  I think she’s playing the best tennis of her career.  She’s not only in the best place I’ve ever seen, I think she’s the best player that’s ever lived.  I said that a while ago.  But she’s cementing it in everyone’s mind.  She’s just a level above anyone.  There’s no doubt about it.

 

I think actually in a way what’s happened with her sister, the difficulties she’s had as she’s gotten into the later stages of her career, actually in a way helped Serena because it made her realize she wanted to enjoy and take advantage of these last couple years.  She realized and maybe appreciated a little bit more the talent that she has.

 

Q. Do you think on the men’s side in the U.S. there’s a lack of a major personality since Andy Roddick has gone?

JOHN McENROE:  Well, I think these players, we’re at an exceptional time in our sport certainly.  What we’re seeing is something the level of which we haven’t seen before.  In a way, the players are doing anything and everything to sort of allow the tennis to speak for themselves.  I think Djokovic is making an effort to spread the word, spread his personality.  I think Nadal has a lot of personality on the court.  Federer is the most beautiful player I’ve ever seen play.

 

None of these guys are out there doing the things that Connors and I were doing.  That’s the way they are.  They choose to do it in a different way and that’s perfectly acceptable because there’s a variety of reasons.  That’s a whole other issue, a whole other question about why that is.

 

But certainly in any one-on-one sport, it’s imperative, when people are getting behind cities or teams, when they root for what we call soccer, you call football, American basketball, whatever team you’re behind, you’re behind the whole city and team as opposed to an individual.  We need to do more to make people have a rooting interest, get to know the players a little more, do a better job promoting them, et cetera.

 

Q. Recently at the French Open there was a lot of talk about the top four, the dominance of the top four, making men’s tennis boring.  I wanted to know what your feeling about that was. 

JOHN McENROE:  I think it’s important that you have people that separate themselves and there’s great rivalries like Nadal/Federer, Nadal/Djokovic, now Murray trying to break into the mix.  They have been unbelievably dominant, how successful they’ve been.  If you look at the run that some of the other guys, when I played Connors, Borg, Ivan, there were four guys separated from the pack for a while.  There’s times where that happens.  This isn’t that unusual.

 

I think in a way it should be, if anything, an incentive to the other guys to try to break into the mix.  If these guys are too good, more power to them.  I think it just shows you how great they are.  Everyone is saying how athletic the game is getting, equipment is an equalizer for everyone, but these guys are still winning.  I think we should enjoy it while we can.

 

CHRIS EVERT:  There’s nothing boring about greatness.  Those top players, like John said, are at a level by themselves.  That will form rivalries.  Hopefully there’s one stirring up right now with Nadal/Djokovic.  Their matches are epic matches.  So I don’t think ‘boring’ is the right word.  I wished the women had four up there like the men do right now.  Right now it just seems to be one.

 

Q. John, you talked earlier about Serena being a favorite for the women’s side.  Could you tip who you have for the men’s title this year.  Seems like it’s a tough pick coming in with different forms, Andy Murray having skipped Roland Garros. 

JOHN McENROE:  Yeah, I think it is a tougher call to see who the favorite would be.  I would pick Djokovic 1 and Murray 2.  This is me personally based on sort of what’s been going on.  I think Murray will be hungrier not playing the French, maybe a little fresher.  Then Roger, because he still has such a great game for grass.  It’s tough to win it back-to-back at his age.  Rafa having come back so great, maybe I’m wrong, ’cause I thought he would be a little tired.  After the Djokovic semi, there will be some type of letdown, and he can’t impose his will as easily as on other courts.  I would put him a close 4.  That would be the order if I had to pick 1 to 4.

 

Q. What about for you, Chrissy, a thought on the men’s side? 

CHRIS EVERT:  Yeah, I think this is the beauty of having the top four players playing so evenly and closely.

Djokovic comes to mind only because I think the disappointment at the French Open.  Then Federer, you know, the thing is that I have a sneaking suspicion that Federer has put all his eggs in one basket and he’s gunning for Wimbledon.  It’s the only Grand Slam that he really has a legitimate chance.  I don’t mean that against him, it’s just that the competition is so good.  Then, you know, Andy Murray, really depends on the nerves, how he reacts.  Every year that he doesn’t win it, there’s more and more pressure on him.  Nadal, I mean, he could come out of the gate and just surprise us all.  I think you kind of wonder after winning the French, I know he’s always hungry, but I think this court doesn’t suit him as well as it does the other players.

 

It’s just totally up in the air.  That’s the wonderful thing about it.  That’s the wonderful thing about having the top four men playing so closely and evenly.  It’s a hard question, and I don’t know if John agrees with it, coming into a tournament, as an analyst, you like to see the first few rounds and see how they’re playing.  Especially after the first week, you kind of have a better view.

 

JOHN McENROE:  Nadal seeded 5, and he plays Djokovic in the quarters, that’s going to impact more than just those two people.  We have to first wait and see what they decide to do with Nadal.

 

Q. John, you mentioned a moment ago that Serena you thought was the best player that ever lived.  If she creeps up in singles Grand Slam titles to Roger, I’m wondering if it’s fair or your thoughts on whether or not she’s the best player of her generation, male or female?

JOHN McENROE:  Well, that’s a difficult one to answer.  I mean, I think you’re talking about apples and oranges.

She’s certainly one of the greatest athletes in the history of our sport, male or female, there’s no doubt about that.  I mean, that’s a given.

 

I don’t see where you can really get very far saying — when you get in direct comparisons with both of them.  That’s like saying, Who is better, Steffi or Andre?  You get into all different types of things.  And I don’t think there’s an answer.  I would definitely say she’s one of the greatest athletes and players, male or female.  I would definitely say that.

 

Q. They’re both defending champions.  Talk about their sort of preparation, their momentum going into Wimbledon, both Federer and Serena. 

JOHN McENROE:  Obviously they do things different.  Roger played and won Halle.  Serena, as far as I understood, went back to the States.  They know exactly what they need to do now more than ever.

I think clearly it’s tougher for Roger at this stage ’cause he has to go out and play best-of-five.  The recovery for longer matches would be tougher, especially if he had to do a few in a row.

 

I do think for Roger that his best chance remains Wimbledon.  As I said last year, it’s his best bet to win a major.  And Serena has proved she can win and is a big favorite anywhere.  She’s got such an intimidation factor that it’s going to be difficult for anyone to beat her.

 

As we all know, everyone has bad days.  She was down 2-Love, couple breakpoints to Kuznetsova in the quarters, had to pull out.  In almost any tournament, you’re going to have one or two days where you’re going to be struggling a little bit.

 

There’s perhaps a handful of players on the other side of the draw that could possibly be able to step in and pull off an upset in that situation, more so on the men’s side than the women’s because there’s huge guys like Rosol type of guy who on a given day could provide more problems.

 

Q. John, I wanted to ask about Nadal.  Do you have any insight into the toll that winning the French this time around took on him, especially the five-setter against Djokovic?  As part of that, could you discuss the pros and cons in Nadal’s case of skipping a grass court tune-up this year heading into Wimbledon?

JOHN McENROE:  First of all, I think he made the right move not playing.  Last year when he played the French, he went and played Halle.  I can’t say this because he was probably having trouble with the knees already, but to me it did contribute to make them even worse, his uncertainty.  I think he needed the break, particularly since that was the first best-of-five set, first major he played since Wimbledon of last year.

 

As far as the wear and tear, emotionally, physically, it’s difficult to say.  I interviewed him after he won the French.  I was amazed how well he bounced back from the Djokovic match, given the fact he hadn’t played as tough a match as that.  He’s certainly phenomenal.  He’s unbelievable.  I hope that he stays healthy.  I would just say emotionally after everything he went through, it would be hard not to have some type of letdown for a period of time.

 

I think for me coming into Wimbledon, because of everything that sort of goes into winning an event like that, to me I would pick him the fourth most likely guy to win it.  I would drop him down below the other three guys there because I think there will be some toll that will be taken, maybe even more emotional than physical.  The movement that he banks on on clay is not going to be quite as easy on grass for him.  He may not be quite as confident.  Having said that, maybe he’ll take the opposite and he’ll be so happy he’s back out there, it wouldn’t shock me if he won it.

 

Q. (Question regarding the men’s seedings and whether they should deviate from current rankings.) 

JOHN McENROE:  I think they should seed Nadal in the top four.  I don’t think anyone would murmur any complaint whatsoever.  I think Wimbledon is the only tournament I’m aware of out of the four majors that does change the seedings.  I don’t know exactly how they do it.  Apparently there’s a formula, a committee, a combination.  But clearly he should be one of the top four seeds in my book.

 

Q. Let’s say they don’t.  That would obviously have an enormous effect on the other four. 

JOHN McENROE:  Ferrer is going to be the five seed if he’s not the four seed.  Therefore, if he played Nadal in the quarters anyway, it would be like the same old, same old for him, because he’s always had to play one of those four guys in the quarters.  If you were to, say, have Nadal play Djokovic in the quarters, possibly Murray or Federer, that would be a big difference, yeah.  It would be absolutely wrong for that to happen, in my opinion.

 

Q. We saw Rafa do an incredible exhibition at Roland Garros.  How do you break down Rafael Nadal on clay?

JOHN McENROE:  It’s sort of like what the person asked before about breaking down Serena on grass.  I’ve watched and played a lot.  I grew up playing a lot of clay, certainly experienced the ups and downs.  Watching the best of the best, Borg and others.  But this guy is without a doubt the ultimate nightmare to play on that surface because I used to think you could take advantage of his serve.  His serve has gotten a lot better.  I used to think maybe you could bring him in.  He’s one of the best volleyers in the world.  He’s certainly one of the fittest in the world.  He’s certainly got more topspin than I’ve ever seen.  He seems to have more shots than anyone on that surface.

 

The only hope you do have is if you were blessed to be born 6’5″, 6’6″, you swing for the fences, you have one of those days where everything works, you basically go for broke the way everybody did, the way some guys that beat him.  Otherwise, you’re in for a nightmare of a day.

 

Having said that, I think it gives you an idea of how determined and well Djokovic was that he put himself in a position to be up 4-3 in the fifth on a pretty hot day, be that close to winning, five points from winning the match.  To me that was the greatest clay court match I’ve ever seen.

 

Q. You were both talented enough to win multiple major championships.  If you could only win one major in tennis, is Wimbledon the one that everyone wants to win? 

CHRIS EVERT:  For me, yes.  If I were to only win one, I would prefer to win Wimbledon rather than any of them.

 

JOHN McENROE:  Growing up as a kid in New York, even though it’s very special to be close to home, ball boy at the event, there’s something magical, it seems so far away when you’re a kid, so beautiful when you’re on TV, to see grass courts, it’s certainly the one growing up that’s the most talked about.  I think it still continues to be.

 

CHRIS EVERT:  It’s the first one we saw on TV.  I remember watching Margaret Court/Billie Jean King play the finals.  I don’t know if it was black and white, but it pretty much was black and white.  Like John said, I remember all the way across the ocean, the history of the event adds to it.

 

Q.  Do you have any quick one final memory from any of the Wimbledons you participated in, something that sticks in your head about the event itself?

CHRIS EVERT:  I mean, it’s hard because we had 15- to 20-year careers.  It’s the one tournament that’s bigger than the players.  Wimbledon is the star more than the players.  It’s the showcase.  That showcase is more the star.  That’s all I can say.

 

JOHN McENROE:  For me personally, it was the tiebreaker in ’80 when I played the match with Borg that people come up to me a hundred times more than any other match I played.  That would be the moment for me.

 

Q.  Chrissy, a question about Madison Keys.  What do you think about her potential? 

CHRIS EVERT:  Yeah, she definitely has the weapons to be top five.  She has the weapons to be number one.  There’s so much more that goes into it than physical weapons.  I can almost say she almost matches Serena’s serve as far as power.  Out of all the players out there, she comes the closest to Serena’s serve.  The power off both sides is tremendous for someone that young.

 

So much remains to be seen.  That’s the mental side of the game, which really hasn’t been tested as much because she is an up-and-coming player and she has no pressure when she’s playing these players right now.

That remains to be seen mentally how focused she is, how hungry she is for success.  That remains to be seen.  Of all the young players, I would have to say she, even more than Sloane Stephens, has the potential to be top 10.

 

Q. I’m curious to know who of the up-and-coming players will win their first slam, whether it be this Wimbledon or down the road? 

CHRIS EVERT:  You have to be a soothsayer to predict that.  The head of the list would be Madison Keys, I think, along with Sloane Stephens.  Bethanie Mattek, she’s had a lot of success the last three months.  She’s like a different person, different player out there, so I wouldn’t rule her out.  I think of the Americans, again, I think Madison or Sloane would have to be the next Grand Slam winner.

 

JOHN McENROE:  If I had to pick one guy, I’d probably pick Dimitrov right now if you have someone who is going to do it.  I think he’s on the right track again after sort of disappointing some of the people that predicted greatness early.  He’s moving in the right direction.  Then there’s going to be someone like Raonic, one of these guys, that gets it, figuring out how to utilize his weapons more on a court like Wimbledon.

 

Q. I wanted to see if you could weigh in overall on the state of American tennis. 

JOHN McENROE:  Basically, certainly we had a lot of success in the past, probably became pretty spoiled.  Clearly Americans have come to expect and want Grand Slam contenders and winners.  We’ve had some excellent players.  Sam Querrey has been a solid professional, very solid.  John Isner got to 10 in the world.  Mardy Fish got to the top 10 before it overwhelmed him.  If you want to compete and win majors at this stage, the athleticism necessary is becoming even more exceptional.  That’s something we have to try to search out and provide the opportunity for kids that don’t have it.  That’s the biggest thing.

 

Unlike women, or girls, I believe girls are much more likely to play tennis than boys.  The greatest American athletes played football or basketball.  We’re lower down on the totem pole.  We need to do something like that.  Unless you get a guy like John Isner, 6’10″, one of the biggest serves ever.  Therefore, he can be a threat to anyone.

 

To go all the way in a major, you need a combination of things.  That’s what we need to push towards.  That’s a whole other discussion.  But we’re certainly not where we want to be, no doubt about that.  Ryan Harrison is a solid pro.  He’s trying to make headway.  Jack Sock is athletically good, but you have to be incredible.  We’ll have to wait and see what happens, the next five, ten years, how we veer toward better and better athletes in our sport.

 

CHRIS EVERT:  On the men’s side, all those guys that John mentioned, those guys came out in the last few years.  On the women’s side, I think we have 10 in the top 100.  That’s more than any other country in the world.  That was at the French.  That’s a big statement for some of the critics that have been criticizing American tennis, USTA, whatever.  We’ve got a good stable of players.  We’re not even naming Jamie Hampton, Melanie Oudin0, Alison Riske.  There’s a lot of girls I see down in Boca Raton at the USTA center hammering it out every afternoon.  There’s playing matches and matches, competing against each other, getting better and better as a result.  I think it’s a good time for American women’s tennis.  I think now people can kind of be quiet about their criticism of American tennis ’cause things are definitely starting to happen, pretty exciting things.

 

Q. Who could be the biggest surprise at Wimbledon this fortnight?  Maybe Berdych or Del Potro, maybe Wawrinka is having a good year. 

JOHN McENROE:  First of all, Berdych has been in a Wimbledon final, and Del Potro has won a major.  Stan’s game I don’t think is as well-suited.  All those guys are veteran players.  Certainly one of these big hitters, and Tsonga, are looking to have a better chance.  Out in left field would be the guys I mentioned.  These guys have worked hard to get in a position where they’re trying to get closer and closer to the top guys.  I think that this would be a perfect opportunity depending on what happens.  If they seed Nadal 5, that would open the door up for a couple of these other guys that could make a run a lot further where they wouldn’t have to play one of those guys in the semis.  Berdych beat Djokovic and Federer one year and still had to beat Nadal in the final.  Some of it’s going to depend on what happens with the draw.

 

Q. You spoke generally about U.S. players who might break through.  Can you look ahead to the US Open and speculate about how you think the Americans will perform this year. 

JOHN McENROE:  Pretty hard to jump ahead.  Most of the guys that we’ve talked about, Isner, Querrey, Ryan, they all seem to prefer the hard courts.  That would improve our chances.  Obviously they’re going to have the crowd in their favor, so that would help.

 

You have a lot of things leading up to it.  The obvious ones:  health, how they do leading up to Cincinnati.  It’s difficult to say.  Again, it’s not just the luck of the draw, but to some degree you have to see those things.  Otherwise, I think the upside for Jack Sock is he’s probably the biggest upside we have for a young guy.  Ryan would be close behind him.  Those are the two guys that have the most room to improve to me right now, other than the juniors that we’re waiting to see who is going to break out.

 

CHRIS EVERT:  Yeah, I think the Americans, young Americans, get really, really excited about the US Open, I think more than any other Grand Slam tournament.  I think consequently they have good results because we’ve seen them.  Primarily, like John said, they’re hard court players.  American players are not natural grass court players or clay court players, they’re hard court players.  Most of them have been brought up on the hard courts.  I think with all that, the spirit of playing their country’s championship, the fact that they’re hard court players, the fact that I know on the women’s side they’re all pretty much supporting one another, I think we’re going to see some upsets, definitely upsets, some good results from the Americans.

 

Q. John, with Roger Federer winding down, do you think if he would win Wimbledon he would retire at the end of the season? 

JOHN McENROE:  I don’t know.  I don’t think he’s going to retire for a couple years, he loves playing too much.  The last guy that did that was Pete Sampras.  Very few guys sort of go out winning a major.  He quit right then.

Even though it was an awesome move and I respect it, I think sometimes even he questions it.  He left a big void.

Roger seems to enjoy it almost more than any player I’ve ever seen.  It would shock me if he would do that, absolutely shock me.

 

Q. Chris, this is really not about Wimbledon, per se, but it’s about the Women’s Tennis Association, I know their 40th anniversary is coming up.  Could you speak about what the kind of risk and rewards seemed to be at the time that the WTA was formed, and in retrospect what has it accomplished in your view in terms of making tennis a viable career for women?

CHRIS EVERT:  Let me just say, I was lucky enough to be around 40 years ago.  I was not a part of the beginning.  Basically I was a school girl.  I just listened to everything my dad told me to do.  I didn’t get involved in the politics of it.  But I was aware of what was going on and thought it was pretty progressive, pretty ahead of the times that Billie Jean got these women together to form a union.  I didn’t even know what a union was at 18 years old.  I thought of maybe going down in the coal mines or something when I heard ‘union’.  It was really pretty daring.

 

Then they formed the WTA, where they would have a president, officers, meetings, and basically the women would make the decisions, all the politics of the game, instead of having somebody tell us what to do all the time.  I thought that was great.

 

Then Virginia Slims came along.  I stuck with the WTA, being conservative.  We had two tours.  When Virginia Slims became the one tour, that’s when women’s tennis really took off.  We were making good money.  We were providing a living for a good 200 players down the road.  Funny enough, that circuit at that time meant more to us than Grand Slam tournaments.  That’s where it’s really changed over the years.

 

But if it wasn’t for Billie Jean, if she was in golf, golf would have been the premiere sport for women, not tennis.  So thank God for her.

 

Q. John, you’ve said that Nelson Mandela is the most special person you ever met.  What does it mean to you that he listened to your match from his cell, and did you go out there to the island? 

JOHN McENROE:  I didn’t go to the island, but rather felt like a complete jerk that he listened to the match at the Robben Island prison when I was whining about the call.  It certainly gave me some perspective about the situation I was in.  I shouldn’t have had a whole lot to complain about.

 

At the same time I feel immensely proud that in some way I was able to connect with people beyond your wildest dreams, the type of people you would be able to connect with that said I would have given $10 million that he felt it was an honor meeting me.  I felt ludicrous him saying he was honored meeting me.

 

It was amazing he didn’t seem to have an ounce of bitterness or resentment towards anyone when I was lucky enough to meet him.  It was certainly a moment I will never forget, or an hour.  I gave him my racquet that I played with at that time.  I saw him pick it up and hold it.  I felt lucky that I was able to be part of that.

 

Q. Can you talk about the experience you have of meeting celebrities, whether it’s Pele, the Stones?  Who are some of your favorites?

JOHN McENROE:  I wouldn’t trade that for anything.  There’s a mutual respect on some level.  Sometimes you pinch yourself that you’re even hearing people like Pele, Muhammad Ali, Wayne Gretzky, Michael Jordan, all these great players, that sort of on some level look at you on equal footing.  To me, that’s always been the greatest perk that I’ve been able to have, being lucky enough to be good at what I did for a living, playing tennis, that I could meet people, whether it was incredible athletes, a couple guys from the Rolling Stones, Paul McCartney, the Beatles, whatever it is.  It’s unbelievable.  I’ve never taken that for granted and I never will.

I think while it gives you a certain humility, it also gives you a great deal of satisfaction and pride that you feel on some level you’re inspiring in some tiny way, that they have even close to the same level of appreciation that I have for being around them a little bit.

 

Share

“On The Call” – Chris Evert and Cliff Drysdale Discuss French Open

Evert_ChrisCliff Drysdale

(May 21, 2013) ESPN held a media conference call with Chris Evert and Cliff Drysdale to discuss the upcoming French Open, which will be broadcast on ESPN.  Here are a few questions and answers from the conference call which included discussions about Roland Garros favorites – Serena Williams and Rafael Nadal, Serena’s maturation as a player and her chance of breaking Evert’s mark of 18 major titles (or even Graf’s 22), plus the state of Roger Federer’s career and the diminished difference between clay courts and grass courts compared to years ago:

 

Q. I want to ask you, Chris, whether you think Serena Williams might finally add a second French Open title given the way she’s playing in general and particularly on clay these days. I’m wondering, given all of her talent, are you surprised that she hasn’t already won several?

CHRIS EVERT: That’s a good question. I think it’s long overdue, her second French Open win. It’s mind-boggling to me that she hasn’t been in the final since 2002. To me, that’s mind-boggling. So she hasn’t had her best results at the French. She has improved tremendously on the clay. We talk about how she’s improved her game. But in my mind I’m impressed with how consistent she’s become and how patient she’s become and how she’s harnessing that power to be not only an effective clay court player but a tremendous clay court player. I think she had a quote, I can’t remember the newspaper, about, When I look in the mirror, that’s my chief competition. The thing is, if Serena Williams doesn’t have a bad day like she did last year against Razzano, she just manages to play her normal game, I think she will win her second French Open, yes.

 

Q. I wanted to ask about Nadal, another person who’s just been dominant this year. In January everybody was wondering, oh, my God, is he ever going to come back, will he ever be the same. Can you talk about what he’s done so far and is he invincible on clay.

CLIFF DRYSDALE: Yeah, I think he is invincible on clay. The way that he’s played so far, just two matches all year. To be honest, it’s not just a clay court comeback. He’s only lost a couple of matches. I guess there’s a lesson to be learnt from taking a lot of time off when you’re injured. He’s clearly by most definitions a clear favorite to win the French. That said, I’ve picked Djokovic to win it because I’m a big believer in Novak’s game and I believe he’s going to be able to take him down.

 

CHRIS EVERT: Wow, Cliff. If I can say one thing about Djokovic. I was so impressed with the way he played Nadal last year at the French Open, especially when Nadal kind of cruised through the first two sets, then Djokovic went on a tear and won the third set, was up a break in the fourth. That made me realize then that Djokovic was a definite contender for the French Open. I think Nadal looks like the favorite, but I think Djokovic can threaten him definitely. I wonder if Nadal is a little fearful of playing Djokovic. I think that’s going to be the intriguing matchup.

 

CLIFF DRYSDALE: 2011, he took Rafa down a few times on the clay, which was really I think when the whole thing changed for Djokovic. I think he’s a different player now. He doesn’t have the same record that Nadal has at this point. If I had to bet my house on it, I guess I’d have to go with Rafa for sure based on his record and the way he’s playing now. But there are some questions about the fact he hasn’t played that much, he took all that time off, and his knees obviously.

 

Q. Chris, this is sort of geared toward Nadal. Could you speak to the main challenge of a top player returning to the game after an extended break, in his case seven months. Is it confidence, ball striking, timing? What all goes into regaining that form after an extended break?

CHRIS EVERT: Oh, my God. All of the above. That’s a great question. Maybe Cliff can answer this, too, because maybe he’s taken time off. I took a period of three or four months off, and I came back. Definitely confidence, no doubt about it. Your confidence is waning a little bit. Definitely the timing, the striking of the ball, the reaction time. Definitely the concentration. You’re going to get more winded because you haven’t done tennis cardiovascular. You maybe trained hard off the court, but a match cardiovascular is a lot different.

I just think every element is affected both physically, mentally and emotionally, psychologically. Everything is affected when you first come back. For these champions, it only takes about two or three tournaments to get back, for me. Once you have those two or three tournaments under your belt, I think you’re fresher and your mind is more clear and you’re better off than when you left for seven months.

 

CLIFF DRYSDALE: I totally agree with the last thing you said. There are two sides to that coin. You take time off, it might hurt you, but it also gives you, as you said, a new enthusiasm quotient, liveliness quotient. You really want to be on the court. You’re not tired out. It’s like picking up a new tennis racquet sometimes. A new piece of equipment gives you a new lease on life. History is dotted with people who have come back. We talk about Serena. How many times has she come back and shows no signs of a negative result because of it.

 

Q. Chris, with clay, the surface from your standpoint, what are some of the things you love about it as a player, what are some of the things that you hate about it as a player?

CHRIS EVERT: First of all, I think the clay is fast. I think the balls are faster, the clay is faster. The conditions are faster than when I was playing. Plus the fact that players are obviously hitting the ball harder. I guess the point I’m trying to make, you have to have patience up to a certain point, but you don’t have to have as much patience as my days, when you played moon ballers, you had rallies of 20 shots.

 

The tough thing is sliding. If you haven’t grown up on clay, it’s hard to learn that instinctive sliding technique. So if you’re not used to sliding, if you don’t like it, you’re going to have trouble. That’s one tough thing.

Again, you’re going to have to hit three or four more balls to win a point. Kind of backtracking, contradicting myself. Patience is a factor. If you’re not patient, you’re not going to win on clay. So the patience, the sliding is tough.

 

I like the fact that you have a little more time to think of a strategy, a little more time to work the ball around the court, to sort of work the point. I like that. You’re not as rushed as on other surfaces. You feel if you’re a defensive player, you’ve got at least a shot. It’s important to be defensive and offensive on the clay. But it’s better to be defensive on the clay. It gives you more benefits than being defensive on any other surface.

 

CLIFF DRYSDALE: I think Chris made the best point when she said the surfaces have become more universal. The balls are much more lively now than they used to be. The court is playing much quicker than it used to. You’ve got the options on clay now, as well.

 

To me the biggest thing about clay is it’s so much easier on the body. I think Rafael Nadal might get his wish one of these days, there may be more tournaments played on clay. There’s discussions about even turning Miami into a clay court tournament. It’s easier on the body and I think it would help the longevity of the players.

 

From a technical standpoint, as Chris was saying, it’s a different kind of game. The transition from the French to Wimbledon used to be really dramatic, and it’s not as dramatic now as it was, because Wimbledon is much slower and the French is much quicker.

 

Q. Chris, do you think any of the women on the tour are mentally in position to be able to beat Serena? And to both of you, the status of Federer’s game, in particular his movement?

CHRIS EVERT: That’s a good question. I just think when I look at someone like Azarenka, she actually played a good second set against Serena. She didn’t play a bad match against Serena, yet she won four games. When I look at that stat, then I look at Maria, she handled Maria so easily on the clay.

 

I don’t think it’s going to take a player to overpower her. First of all, I don’t think anybody out there can overpower her. The thing that we have to remember is this is still Serena’s weakest surface. Let’s not lose sight of that. She has to, as she said in her own press conferences, she has to remain really consistent, cut down on the errors. She likes to go for her shots. This is where she’s transformed herself into a better clay court player.

 

If there was a player that came out of the blue that was crafty, had a great dropshot, had some great short angling to get her off the baseline, bring her up to the net, I think that’s the only chance that anybody has. The day of the Martina Hingis type players, I don’t see those players as much anymore. I just see players that just like to bash the ball from the baseline and use their power more. I think it would take a versatile player like that to carve shots, dropshots, slice, get Serena off her rhythm, bring her up to the net. If there’s a player out there like that, maybe we’ll see her in the next couple weeks.

 

CLIFF DRYSDALE: You’ve got to remember that her serve is so dominant now. The court is playing a little faster at the French, so that’s helping her. Number two, she’s not squawking and squealing like she used to on the court. She’s much calmer. I think that’s made a huge difference to her as well.

 

You talked about patience earlier. She’s much more patient. She doesn’t take things as seriously as she used to. She’s in a much better place mentally. She cannot be beaten by anybody but herself.

 

CHRIS EVERT: I think you’re absolutely right. If you look at her on TV, she’s managing her emotions in between points so much better and she’s managing her energy. She’s conserving her energy. She’s like in her own little zone, own little world. She’s going to need that for the French.

 

CLIFF DRYSDALE: All that said, I want to emphasize what you said, don’t forget this is her weakest surface. If there’s a chance to beat her, this is it.

 

CHRIS EVERT: And the first week. Because once she gets grooved, going into the second week, she’s going to be tougher.

 

Q. Cliff, your feelings on Federer, the status of his game, particularly his movement?

CLIFF DRYSDALE: Don’t write him off. We’ve written him off a few times in the past. My sense always with him is he’s also mentally in a really good place. He doesn’t mind losing matches. Just from a technical, mechanical standpoint now, he may be, all things being equal, I think Andy Murray and Rafa Nadal, Novak Djokovic, would be at least 50, maybe a little above 50 on the head-to-head with him, 50/50, but he is still a contender. I just caution you, if you check his record, he’s never anywhere other than at the end of the a tournament. If you get to the semifinals, anything can happen in these events. I know it’s a cliché, but I’m cautioning everyone that we’ve written him off before. Suddenly two years ago he wins the French championships and he’s No. 1 in the world.

I think his movement has always been his strong point. I think it still is one of his strongest points. If there’s an issue with Fed, sometimes his confidence during a match, he starts to spray balls. He used to be able to get away with it, but he doesn’t anymore. Djokovic, Nadal, Andy Murray don’t allow you to get away with it.

 

CHRIS EVERT: The thing with Roger, two things have to be working for him to win a Grand Slam again: his serve, his forehand. Like Cliffy said, when he slaps that forehand around, he can slap it for winners or he can slap it for errors. But that forehand has to be a weapon. He’s got to be making those slaps. His first serve, he’s got to win some free points. It’s a lot of work for him on the clay. That’s why for me, Wimbledon is the one tournament where he can get away with a big serve and a big forehand a little bit easier. Anyway, I put him like fourth or fifth as a favorite.

 

Q. Sorry to dwell on Serena, but do you feel like she needs that second French to secure her place to the upper echelon, if you will?

CLIFF DRYSDALE: Not in my book.

 

CHRIS EVERT: No, no.

 

CLIFF DRYSDALE: She’s secured it already. The fact that she hasn’t won the French twice, she’s won it once. You know, I look at it sort of from a historical standpoint and wonder who would you put up against Serena. Chris can answer this question a lot better. Try to put herself up or Martina or even Steffi. It’s hard for me to imagine, day in, day out, if Serena is playing like she’s playing now, that you can’t count her already as one of the all-time greats even if she doesn’t win the French.

 

CHRIS EVERT: It’s not going to put a blemish on her record at all, especially if she continues to win Wimbledon and the US Open and the Australian. I think with her serve and her athleticism, her power, her court mobility, I just think when she’s on, she’s the greatest player we’ve ever seen, ever. Now, whether her record is the greatest remains to be seen because she hasn’t retired yet. But I think she is really the greatest player. I have seen Martina and Steffi at their best. There are little chinks in those players’ armor, but it was a different era, where you didn’t need to be the perfect player.

 

On the one hand I hate comparing generations because I feel the current generation is going to be better, but on the other hand it’s hard to imagine a better player than Serena when she’s playing well. I don’t even know if that was the question, but I just had to answer it that way. If you talk about Grand Slams, you know, to me she’s going to pass Martina and I. It’s still a reachable goal for her to win 22 and match Steffi. If she plays another two, three, four years healthy, she can break all those records.

 

Q. Do you think there’s any concern for Djokovic considering he lost in the first round to Dimitrov and then lost the match to Berdych where he was 5-2 up? Do you think he’s placing too much pressure on himself for the French Open? And then there’s 12 American women in the top 100 of the WTA. Do you see any of those women besides Serena making noise in the second week of the French Open?

CLIFF DRYSDALE: On Novak, no, I don’t think that he came that close. I think mentally he’s very strong. He’s the kind of player who does not get down on himself because of a loss. The things that he says, his thought processes are kind of like Andre Agassi who talked about enjoying the journey, the process, of getting to places on a tennis court. I just think that, no, it doesn’t hurt him. If anything, losing early gives him a little more rest. I watch him play. I wonder how the heck these top players can play week in, week out at that intensity and level.

I don’t think it hurts Djokovic. If it would have hurt him any way, it would have been mentally for him to say, Oh, gee, I’m not playing as well. I don’t think he’s susceptible to that kind of thinking.

 

As for the ladies, the 12 in the top 100 in the U.S. I’m very excited by that. I think Madison Keys has got a real shot. It’s a matter of maturity. I think Sloane Stephens is equally in. Maybe not a legitimate shot to win, but I’d be very surprised if we don’t see a move from either her or Madison Keys, Lauren, Jamie Hampton, with real serious shots at getting top 10 and then eventually even top 5. Most of them are young, enthusiastic and really talented. This has a really high enthusiasm quotient for me.

 

CHRIS EVERT: The first question about Djokovic, he’s gone on record saying that the French Open is the most important tournament for him this year. I just think that speaks for itself. I think whatever has happened before, he does have a win over Nadal this year. Whatever has happened, I think he’s going to erase the losses and go into this fresh. He wants this one badly, very much like a Maria Sharapova wanted the French last year. In saying that, that I think is going to give him more motivation.

 

As far as the women, I agree with Cliffy. Nobody stands out for the French Open as far as really doing some damage the second week. We’ve got a really consistent roster. Bethanie Mattek, she’s had wins over Sloane Stephens, Errani, who is a great clay courter. She’s gone from like 400 to 100 in three months. I think she is the most improved American player we’ve seen in the last few months. There’s some big names, and Cliff mentioned them. Madison and Sloane, Christina McHale, Lauren Davis just beat Christina McHale, and I’m proud of her because she trains at my academy. But there’s some good, solid American girls that I think in the next couple years could be top 20 definitely.

 

Q. I was hoping you would give some advice to Maria on what she can do at this point to make more of an impression on Serena’s game on clay or in general. Serena leads 13-2 head-to-head. She’s No. 2 in the world, vying for the No. 1 spot from time to time.

CHRIS EVERT: And remember, Maria didn’t have to beat Serena last year at the French Open, right? She didn’t have to beat Azarenka in the French. I think last year, the draw opened up perfectly for Maria. The tough thing about Maria, the tough thing for her playing Serena is that Maria’s strength, which is her return of serve, really isn’t a strength against Serena, so she can’t win those free points on her return of serve because Serena’s strength that feeds into Maria’s strength is so dominating.

 

When you get on the clay and you start to look at how important moving is, sliding on the clay, really Serena I think is head and shoulders above. Even though Maria’s movement has improved, Serena is still head and shoulders on the clay as far as movement. It’s tough, but at the same time Maria has to believe and just keep that confidence going because she did play a great set and a half at Sony Ericsson. She was dominating, moving well, dictating the points. Serena was a touch off. I think it’s an uphill battle for Maria. Knowing how mentally tough she is, how much she is a fighter, she has just got to hope that Serena has a little bit of a lapse maybe of concentration or whatever and just dive in there at that point. That’s how I feel about that. What do you think, Cliff?

 

CLIFF DRYSDALE: What you said, I could not add anything to it that makes any more sense. You’re exactly right about the points that you’re making. It is about the movement. That’s the problem. The question always is, How can she beat her? Maybe tripping her up when they’re crossing sides after 1-Love in the first set, that would be the best solution. Going back to one thing you said, Chris, to add to what you said earlier, believe it or not this is the best chance you have to beat Serena on this surface overall. You have to bear that in mind. Take comfort in the fact this is her least effective surface, do whatever you can. I think I’m very impressed with the way Maria has come back. She had a tough time with Azarenka last year. But she’s just such a mentally tough competitor, always has been, and it stays that way. It’s all about Serena. Every tournament is all about Serena. But Maria is still in there with her mental strength. She could do it. Look, Serena may lose again early. You never know.

 

CHRIS EVERT: The other thing is she’s players, like Cliff said, when they go into a match against Serena on the red clay, they have to have a little bit of confidence anyway knowing that Serena’s only won this title one time, and that clay hasn’t been her best surface in the past. Maybe there is a shadow of doubt. She may be impatient. She may make errors. They’ve got to see that there’s a little window when they play her at the French versus the other Grand Slams.

 

Q. Thinking back to a year ago at Roland Garros, Errani making it to the final. Chris, are there two or three names you would throw out there who have never won a Grand Slam title, maybe never made the final of a championship, who you think could be a surprise person to make a run into the second week?

CHRIS EVERT: I think Bethanie Mattek-Sands, the way her form has been the last two months, being an American, she’s at a really good place right now in her life and with her tennis. Most of the people that come to mind, like Li Na, who has won it, you can’t underestimate her. Radwanska, I’m still waiting for her to make that step because I think she’s the kind of crafty, smart player that should on paper do well at the French. I don’t think that’s been one of her better tournaments either. So look for her a little bit to do something. (But) it’s a tough one. I look at Sam Stosur. There’s a lot of players, as I said before, like Ivanovic, like Li Na, like Sam Stosur, who have shown they can do well on the red clay. Maybe Ivanovic is another good one. She’s had some good results lately.

 

CLIFF DRYSDALE: I was going to mention her. I wonder what you think about Wozniacki, have we seen the last of her? I think she’s got another big win in her, too. She’s a potential surprise because she’s got the defensive game and clay is by definition good for the defensive players. I like you’re call about Ana because she had her serving problems the same way Maria did, and she seems to have overcome them.

 

CHRIS EVERT: Cirstea, Errani, they’re all dangerous players. You mention Wozniacki, two years ago she’s No. 1 in the world. She seems to be losing. Before she never lost to players she never should lose to. Now she’s losing to players ranked below her. I want to see her do well, but she hasn’t shown me she’s a threat.

 

CLIFF DRYSDALE: Makarova. There’s my outside pick.

 

Q. It’s the Serena day. When you’re talking to other players, how incredibly dominant she is, it’s hard to come up with anybody who has a chance to knock her off, how demoralizing must it be for the other players? How many players out there do you think really believe, I can beat Serena Williams? You have perspective that we don’t have about what goes into the mindset of all these women going into a tournament knowing that this woman is just steamrolling over everybody. What would be able to keep you hopeful you could beat her? Do you think people go into it defeated when they play her?

CHRIS EVERT: I think 99% of the players go out there knowing that they’re going to lose. I do think that. Azarenka, Maria, I just think they definitely give themselves a chance. There’s no way they walk out on the court with Serena and think they’re going to lose. They give themselves a chance because they’re confident and they have beaten Serena before. They do, especially at the French, this is her weakest surface, she could have a bad day. She has the ability to make errors. I’m going to get a little more time to return that dominating serve. I think of all the Grand Slams, this is the one those top players feel they do have a shot and feel a little more confidence.

As far as the other players, the only thing is, if you go out there and play Serena, you see that she’s not in a good mood, she’s starting to spray balls, then I think the body language could give players confidence after a couple of games. It has a lot to do with her body language, the way she’s playing. It almost doesn’t matter how you’re playing. It almost doesn’t matter. You know what, the other players probably hate it when we say this, but it really is all about Serena and how she’s feeling and how she’s playing.

 

Q. Would you have liked to have played her, Chris?

CHRIS EVERT: Well, really, do we have to ask that question (laughter)? I mean, I would have played her 30 years ago. That’s unfair to ask. I mean, with my mind I probably would have definitely drawn her in. When I’m commentating, I’m screaming. I’m like under my breath, ‘Dropshot, hit a short angle, come in, show her something different.’ You can’t be banging balls from the baseline with her. You’re not going to win. She’s got a good volley, she doesn’t have a great volley, but she has a great everything else. Expose her weaknesses a little more. Is it tough to get a dropshot, absolutely. But she will give you some mid-court balls. You’ve got to be creative and do something different with those shots. I don’t think Maria has that in her repertoire. I think Vika does. I think Li Na does. You’ve got to really try to find the right shots to use against her. To me they’re the dropshots, short angles, drawing her into the net.

 

CLIFF DRYSDALE: If you look at it from the other angle, the other question along the same lines is not are the other players beaten when they take the court against her, but what about from her standpoint. She’s lost only two matches this year. She’s only lost two matches this year. But there is time after all the weeks, the practicing, the matches, when you get to a point in a match sometimes where you say, Wait a minute, what is this pip-squeak doing breaking my serve in the first set? You start to think about it, spray a few balls. There’s always the hope from someone playing against her, Errani did it last year, where you do see the opening that Chris was talking about. It’s not a foregone conclusion. You wouldn’t bet against her, but there’s two sides to the mental equation.

 

CHRIS EVERT: Also she’s not 21, she’s 31. I always found that even though she’s had a lot of not vacations, but periods where she’s taken rest and rehabilitated, she’s been out of the game, she still has played a lot of matches. She has to play seven solid, good matches. When you get older, as Roger Federer is finding out the hard way, you have more off days. No doubts about it, you have more off days because you’re not as mentally fresh as you were when you were 21. That could be a danger for her also. My last two years that I played, I’d wake up in the morning and I didn’t want to get out of bed. I dreaded knowing I had to go out there and play a match. That happened not frequently but once in a while.

 

Q. I have so enjoyed this game planning talk. Would you both take a crack at Nadal. In other words, how would you construct a game plan against Nadal at the French? Is there any point in trying to play better defense or be more patient? What do you expose?

CHRIS EVERT: You know what, same thing.

 

Q. Same answer applies?

CHRIS EVERT: I have seen Nadal eight feet behind the baseline. I have seen players dropshot him. He doesn’t like it. He doesn’t like running up. He doesn’t like being on the defensive. He doesn’t like being at the net. You got to take them out of their power zone, right? You have to hit the short angles, dropshots, slice it. I think you have to bring him in, hit them shorter. And I think you have to have a big first serve. Cliffy, what do you think?

 

CLIFF DRYSDALE: I think those are all really good points. It’s hard for me to imagine. There’s got to be more to it than that. My feeling on Rafa, he’s way behind the baseline, like you said. By definition with his strokes, they’ve got so much topspin on them, they’ll jump up a lot. But eventually by definition they end up short. In 2011 the way that Djokovic took him down was by standing on the baseline waiting for the short ball and then making Rafa run every which way from east to west on his side of the court. That is still the formula for beating him. It’s easy to say from a strategic standpoint; it’s not that easy to do.

 

A guy like Federer, for example, with the one-handed backhand, he just can’t do that, whereas a Djokovic can. Andy Murray has also got a kind of game, but I’m not sure he can do it on the clay courts, that can do that same thing: stalk the baseline, wait for the short ball, then bang it. That’s how Rafa is vulnerable. The problem is you have to do it for five sets, four hours, and be in great shape. You don’t have that much margin because, by definition, you’re a much more flat ball hitter than he is with all the topspin he has. That’s the solution.

 

CHRIS EVERT: I think that Roger’s backhand, I could be completely wrong on that, but I think on the clay he has a good slice. He can hit that high backhand slice, hit a short angle. He has that dropshot. But I think Roger, again, could take a set off him. But to keep that up for five sets, yeah, I think Djokovic is the only one.

But Djokovic has the touch. He’s got to mix it up, though.

 

Q. As analysts, when you’re watching the matches, can you tell before the players themselves that the wheels are starting to come off the bus, that they’re starting to lose things?

CLIFF DRYSDALE: That’s an interesting question. I think both Chris and I can tell, you have a sense for when a match is turning around. It’s quite clear often. You can see it before your eyes. But I’m not sure that we can tell before the players themselves.

 

CHRIS EVERT: I think that we can tell before the opponent can see it, for sure. When we’re up there in the box, we’re watching the action down on the court, we’re seeing like Victoria Azarenka play Serena, all of a sudden the point is over, the person that is kind of starting to be upset, starting to show more body language, we see it because the opponent, her attention is centered around herself. She’s not like looking to the other side of the court and saying to herself, Whoa, she’s really upset, I’m going to use it to my advantage. The beauty of commentating is we can see that pretty quickly. Both Cliffy and I, this is the advantage of having played a lot, having had good careers, Grand Slam careers, definitely we can sense, especially knowing the person, what the next move is going to be, how they’re going to react. I think we can see the wheels falling off quicker than their opponent can see it.

 

Related article:

ESPN Broadcast Schedule for the 2013 French Open

Share

“On the Call” With US Davis Cup Captain Jim Courier

Jim Courier

(March 13, 2013) United States Davis Cup Captain Jim Courier held a media conference call to discuss the United States next tie which will be played in Bosie, Idaho April 5-7. Here is the transcript of the call from ASAPSports.

Thanks, everyone, for joining us today.  The U.S. Davis Cup team will face Serbia and world No.1 Novak Djokovic in the Davis Cup quarterfinal by BNP Paribas April 5, 6 and 7 at the Taco Bell Arena in Boise, Idaho.  To date we have sold about 7,000 tickets to the event.  Sales continue to be good and we look forward to having a full house supporting Team USA.
This is not the official team announcement.  That will be done in two weeks.  We wanted to make Jim available to the media to talk about the tie and about being in Boise.
We’ll open it up to questions for Jim.

Q.  Jim, altitude was part of the decision to play in Boise.  Can you expound what the benefits are to your team playing in altitude.
CAPTAIN COURIER:  Sure.  When we were looking at this tie, we sat down, Jay Berger, who is the coach of the Davis Cup team beside me, we all sat down with the players and looked at what we thought could give us the best possible advantage playing against a really difficult team in Serbia, looking at what we do well, which primarily our team is an aggressive team.  We like to serve well.  The players that we’ve had playing singles and doubles for our team all are big servers, tend to be tall players in general.
Altitude, if you’re not familiar with what it does to a tennis ball, the ball travels through the air a lot faster.  This is mid‑level altitude.  This isn’t super high altitude, say like a Denver.  It’s controllable altitude.  But the ball will move through the court, bounce higher, get onto the players quicker.  It’s typically pretty good for an offensive player.
The ball, it takes time to get adjusted and control in these conditions, as well.  Our team will try to get out there fairly early to adjust to the Boise altitude.

Q.  Any thought of playing at 5,000 feet or something like that or is that too much?
CAPTAIN COURIER:  5,000 feet is pretty challenging for everyone involved.  Our team has played higher than that, in Bogota, which is north of 8,000 feet.  That becomes really not even tennis.  You can’t spin the ball.  Challenging.
We’re looking for an advantage while still keeping it social.

Q.  You’ve been here before and played an exhibition out here.  Was there anything else about Boise that was attractive to you?
CAPTAIN COURIER:  I like Boise in general.  It’s not a widely known city certainly for the international community, but it’s a beautiful neighborhood, area.  A lot of great amenities there.  I think everyone will have a great time out there.

Q.  Another sort of condition question that has to do with the surface.  I’m hearing that some of the guys like a slightly higher bounce, some like a quicker ball, even with the Bryan brothers there’s some discrepancy.  Where are you in that process and what kind of surface are you going to come up with?
CAPTAIN COURIER:  I was down in Baltimore yesterday testing a couple of different court speeds on behalf of the team actually.  We’re trying to find something that works for everybody.
I don’t think it’s any mystery to you or anyone on this call that was following us in Jacksonville that our team is likely to be a similar team to that one as far as the four players.
Faster courts are not great for a lot of our guys.  So this court I would anticipate it being not quite as speedy as we’ve had at Jacksonville.  But we’re still working through that process.  We’ll get it right.

Q.  Is there a tournament currently on the tour which is pretty similar to that?  The San Jose tournament or something like that?
CAPTAIN COURIER:  I wasn’t in San Jose, so I couldn’t exactly tell you.  I think it would probably fall within a pretty standard range of what you see on tour these days.  There’s a lot of similarity to surfaces, as everyone talks about.  I don’t anticipate it’s going to be an extreme surface from that standpoint.

Q.  Could you paint a word picture for us as far as what a Davis Cup environment is like, especially on home turf.
CAPTAIN COURIER:  Sure.
I think the best way to describe it, it’s more like going to a college sporting event where there’s a very partisan crowd.  Tennis is typically known to be a pretty quiet sport as far as crowd participation goes.  While we don’t encourage our fans at a U.S. Davis Cup match to cheer during play, nor should they at any time at any tennis event, but once the point is over, we do expect and encourage a very partisan crowd.
It’s one of the things that makes Davis Cup unique.  They don’t call ‘game Bob Bryan,’ they call ‘game United States,’ as an example.  You’re playing for the colors on your back, your tennis fans and your country.  We hope for them and expect them to help us get through the weekend.

Q.  How much preparation is needed on‑site?
CAPTAIN COURIER:  We’ll be showing up the weekend prior.  I would anticipate the Serbian squad would do the same.  They’ll be practicing all week long leading into the Friday matches.

Q.  Maybe we can start with the Serbians.  Obviously Djokovic has been playing at a 2011 level or maybe better.  Troicki hasn’t been good on tour but good in Davis Cup.  Talk about confronting that team a little bit.
CAPTAIN COURIER:  They’re one of the best squads out there clearly.  When you have the No.1 player in the world, that’s a nice place to start.
But they’re thick, even without Tipsarevic, who has ruled himself out from what I’ve gathered.  When you have Troicki, a former top 20 player, you have Zimonjic playing doubles, you have five difficult matches in front of you.  That’s what we expect to see.  Not too dissimilar from when we played in Switzerland going up against Federer and Wawrinka, having five tough matches there.
We know it can be done.  We know it’s going to be difficult with Novak.  He’s setting the standard right now.
But Davis Cup is Davis Cup, and hopefully our guys will be able to step up.  They’ll certainly be underdogs on paper and be ready to let it fly.
Troicki hasn’t come out of the blocks particularly hot on tour, but he played a clutch match to help them get through in singles and doubles in Belgium.  We expect him to be ready to go and we’ll certainly be hoping to get some success in the singles on Friday and roll the dice with the Bryan brothers hoping they’re healthy on Saturday and see where we stand.

Q.  Can you talk about Isner.  You had him in Jacksonville.  He took a tough loss the other day.  Not a great start of the year.  Confidence level isn’t there.  He’s key to your team.  Break down what you think is going on with him.
CAPTAIN COURIER:  Well, I think that the season is really just getting started now for him coming off of the uncertainty with the knee.  John certainly was not prepared to play in Jacksonville, although he did bravely go out there and give it his best.  His knee held, which is great news.
He’s won some matches since then, but certainly he’s not satisfied with where he is.  He and his coach are en route to Florida to get some work in together going into Key Biscayne.
If you follow John’s pattern, he’s a momentum player.  Seems like when he gets one good week under his belt, he just runs for four or five months.  Hopefully Miami can get that started.  If it’s not Miami, then hopefully it will be Boise that gets him started.
Again, we’re not naming the team today, as you know.  Assuming everyone’s healthy, I think we’ll field the same squad as we did in Jacksonville.

Q.  Talk a little bit about Sam.  Obviously next week he’ll be the top American player in the rankings.  He seems to be somebody who needs that kind of confidence.
CAPTAIN COURIER:  Well, Sam had I think a pretty significant win in Jacksonville in the fifth match under a lot of pressure, playing against a player substantially lower in the rankings than him.  He had a lot to lose and came up good in the end, which I think will carry him in good stead for moments like that going forward.
Sam has a big game, big serve, big forehand.  He moves pretty well.  He’s going to take on Novak tonight.  Hopefully he’ll do well.  Beat him last time in Paris.
I think it will be an exciting time for Sam.  Being the No.1 American is a great achievement.  He should feel very proud of that.  Hopefully that can propel him to greater things.
How was that for a generic answer (laughter)?

Q.  Both Sam and John have had issues and have admitted about showing their feelings, when they feel like they’re down and everything, the hang dog and everything.  I know they both have said you’ve talked to them about it.  Seeing any progress?  What are you telling them?
CAPTAIN COURIER:  I don’t love that in any player, let alone players that play for the United States.  I’m more of a believer of faking it if you’re not feeling good than showing someone that you’re down.
I know everyone’s different.  You can’t expect everyone to just immediately snap‑to when you ask them to put up a little bit more of a street‑fighter front.
But I’d like our guys to be more street fighters on our team.  I like them to walk around with their chests out.  Sam and John can absolutely bulldoze almost any player on tour if they’re playing well.  With the serves and forehands they possess, they have the ability to take the racquets out of their hands.  It’s hard for me to understand when you don’t show your power.
Everyone is built a little bit differently, that’s for sure.  That’s a little bit of a work in progress, I think.

Q.  It’s not easy to get to Boise from South Florida.  I assume all you guys are going to be coming from South Florida.  Are you flying commercial?
CAPTAIN COURIER:  Flying commercial.  We’ll make it.  You can make it, too.  It’s a one‑stopper.  It’s not that hard.  Miami to Salt Lake.

Q.  If you were hired tomorrow as Sam’s new personal coach, what’s the first thing you would work on with him?
CAPTAIN COURIER:  Well, it’s not really much different than what I work on with him when we’re at Davis Cup, which is we try to get him to be more aggressive on the return of serves, particularly the second serves, just to be a little bit more organized with his game.
I think he’s doing quite well at that.  I think Sam is at a pretty good place right now.
They’re small adjustments for him.  I think if he’s looking to do the right things on the return of serve, he can put a lot of pressure on people, particularly if he’s having a good serving day.
We’ve talked about it before on this call, a little bit of the body language, which Sam is a tall guy who, when he walks around, he looks like he tries to shrink himself to not be seen.
His instinct isn’t to stick his chest out; his instinct is to fit in.  He’s a happy‑go‑lucky kid.  That’s great off the court.  But on the court this game is combat and you have to be ready for it and show it.

Q.  He said recently that the new crop of American guys, the ones that he’s hanging around with, in some ways have an advantage to the guys you were playing with in that they’re all friends, they all get along.  In life that may be more important.  Is it?  Or in life is tennis more important?
CAPTAIN COURIER:  I think life is life and tennis is tennis.  I think you really have to separate, like the way people separate business and life.  Tennis is a business.  The things that people do in business they couldn’t get away in life.  It’s cut‑throat.  You guys know it when you’re doing your work.  It’s rough out there.  Everyone is after your lunch.  And that’s no different in the tennis world.
Look, my best friends by and large come from the tennis world because they’re the people I’ve spent the most time with.  That’s my personal experience.  I’ve been able to carry relationships that have improved since we’ve stopped competing against each other naturally.
I think if you took this generation of players that Sam is involved in, and you put them at the very top of the game, they were winning slams against each other, I think that would alter things, because I experienced that.  Pete Sampras and I played doubles together and ate every meal together, then things changed as we got better, got a little bit more competitive.
It’s pretty simple from my point of view.  Business is business; life is life.  While you don’t have to be a jerk about it while you’re on the court, in between the lines, you play to win, you play for keeps.

Q.  Is Sam too nice to be a No.1?
CAPTAIN COURIER:  I don’t think that he’s too nice to be a No.1.  I think he would just need to be a little bit more consistently hard‑edged on the court to be No.1.  Trying to push him in that direction.

Q.  I wanted to talk to you about your role.  Can you talk about how you became being captain in the Davis Cup, what your role is there.
CAPTAIN COURIER:  The United States Tennis Association organizes the United States Davis Cup team.  There was a process when the prior captain, Patrick McEnroe, went through the process and then I was asked to accept the job, which I accepted by going into the process anyway.  I already indicated I would.  That’s how I got to be the captain.
The job of the captain, did you want to know more about that?

Q.  Yes.  What kind of imprint can you put on this team and the matches?
CAPTAIN COURIER:  So the captain’s job, starting with picking the four players on the squad, working with those players to select what type of surface we want to play on, what type of conditions we want to play on, which led us to Boise for this quarterfinal round.  Through the course of the year I work with the players and their coaches just from a communication standpoint.
All of these players have there day‑to‑day full‑time head coaches, and I play a supporting role during the Davis Cup weeks when those coaches typically don’t come.  They’re allowed to come, but they typically don’t.  I basically become the players’ surrogate coach, along with our Davis Cup coach, who I guess you could say is the assistant to the captain, long time USTA coach Jay Berger, former top 10 player.
Jay and I really run practices during the course of the week.  We organize who is going to play with who.  We try to help these guys play their best tennis.
Then during the course of the matches over the three days, Friday, Saturday, Sunday, I get to sit on the court with the players, get to help them with tactics, adjustments, any questions or concerns they may have in real‑time, which is slightly different, very different, from any other tennis match that the players will play all season long when they’re out there on their own and have to make adjustments by themselves.

Q.  Did you make a long‑term commitment to this?  Is it a year‑to‑year thing?
CAPTAIN COURIER:  I have a two‑year agreement that started this year.  I’ve done two years and extended for another two in 2013.

Q.  What do you like about being the captain?
CAPTAIN COURIER:  I really like getting to spend time with the guys, getting to know them, hopefully being able to help them in some small way become better tennis players, being a resource for them for any kinds of questions that they may have about their careers, whether it’s scheduling, agents, paying taxes.  Anything they’re going to go through I probably will have gone through for the most part.  I like being able to help them from that standpoint.
I really enjoy the weeks we’re all together as a team.  I enjoyed those as a player.  I enjoy them very much as a captain, being able to be there for the guys, trying to help them get the most out of themselves.  Win or lose, we hold our heads up.

Q.  What stood out being a player in Davis Cup?
CAPTAIN COURIER:  I think it’s a unique time to be on a team.  Where tennis is a very individual sport, this is that rare time of the year where you get to come together with a group of guys and make a collective effort towards victory.  You get to share those good and bad moments as opposed to just having them in your own mind.
So I think the team aspect is the real special side for everyone who gets a chance to be involved in Davis Cup or Fed Cup on the female side.

Q.  I think you’ve hit on a couple things you want to see out of your guys.  What do you want from your team on a Davis Cup week?  What kind of mentality or attitude are you looking for?
CAPTAIN COURIER:  Quite simply it’s to be prepared and go out there and lay it on the line.  We don’t get to control the results, we just get to control the preparation and effort.  As long as we’re prepared, ready to play, we lay it out there when the red light comes on, I’m going to be a happy captain.

Q.  The other 48 weeks of the year, are you coaching?
CAPTAIN COURIER:  No, I just kind of sit around and wait for you guys to call me (laughter).

Q.  Do you expect a sold‑out crowd in Boise?  Talk about the job that long time Boise State coach Greg Patton has done bringing this event to Boise.
CAPTAIN COURIER:  I do expect we’ll have a full house.  As Tim indicated early on, already sold 21,000 tickets, so 7,000 per day so far.  I believe it’s about an 11,000‑seat capacity stadium.  We’re closing in on it here with under a month to go.  We expect a great crowd in Boise.
Coach Patton is someone I’ve known since I was 15 years old.  He was my junior Davis Cup team captain for a couple of years.  He’s an absolute ‑ what’s the word ‑ Pied Piper for tennis.  Coach is incredible.  He’s got so much energy and enthusiasm, such a passion for life and for the game, there’s no doubt that he’s instrumental in bringing this to Boise, and he’ll be instrumental in having the great crowd there, for sure, on Friday, Saturday, Sunday.

Q.  The big four attract big support wherever they go.  Do you expect if Djokovic starts working his magic, the crowd will appreciate his effort and continue to root for the USA or the crowd may be swayed?
CAPTAIN COURIER:  I’ve never seen a U.S. Davis Cup crowd switch sides.  But our crowds tend to be very respectful and appreciative of the opposition.  If a good shot is hit, we certainly don’t mind if our fans cheer for the other side.  A good shot deserves applause, but certainly we do expect them to be partisan for us.
So we’d like our crowd to be partisan but fair.

Q.  Do you expect the Bryan brothers to bounce back strongly?
CAPTAIN COURIER:  Typically Zimonjic plays with Troicki for the doubles.  That doesn’t mean it’s going to happen.  We won’t know until about an hour before match time who will be on the other side of the net.
You can rest assured if Bob and Mike are healthy and in Boise, they’ll be eager to get a win for the team.  They’re as good as it gets in Davis Cup.

Q.  Question about the Bryan brothers.  They’re familiar with Boise, having played World TeamTennis.  Did you get any input from them as choosing Boise for the finals?
CAPTAIN COURIER:  We absolutely talked to the guys about the type of scenario that we thought might be ideal, then within those confines Boise was really the top spot as far as what we were looking for.
They certainly had great things to say about Boise.  I was able to play a match out in Boise a little over a decade ago.  I’m familiar with it.  Certainly thought it would be ideal for us.

Q.  The week leading up to the matches, you’ll be out here probably a week before.  Will there be any sort of community events with the tennis players at all?
CAPTAIN COURIER:  Yes, there will be.  We’re planning those right now.  I’m not exactly sure what the scenario is.  I believe there will be something on Tuesday evening.  Typically we also hold an open practice at some stage during the week.
I’m sure the USTA will get you all that information in due time.

Q.  You mentioned a few moments ago about being the over‑dog in Jacksonville.  Most of the ties you played last year you were the underdogs.  As you prepare for this tie, is there a different way that you approach it with the players when you’re favored on paper or not favored on paper?
CAPTAIN COURIER:  We really just approach it match by match as far as in the practice weeks.  We approach it based on the matchups.  Certainly there’s psychology to being an underdog versus a favorite.  We might employ some of that with the players.
But these guys, this is not their first rodeo.  You can’t fool them with sort of standard fair.  I think it will be basically just we’ll know at the end who is going to be the No.1 and No. 2 players, we’ll know what the matchups are going to be, we’ll get the guys ready for that and see what happens.

Q.  As a former No.1, you’ve seen Novak play a ton.  How would you approach attacking him on hard courts?
CAPTAIN COURIER:  Can’t tell you.  Can’t tell you.  That’s kind of the stuff that we have to share with the team.

Q.  You yourself.
CAPTAIN COURIER:  Me myself?

Q.  Jim Courier 2013, with new technology.
CAPTAIN COURIER:  I’m not sure I’d want to go out there with him.  Novak, he’s so sound.  He’s shored up so many of the things that were holding him slightly back, the second serve, the forehand, those things have become so solid.
It’s hard for a player with my weaponry to look at that matchup and be happy, let’s put it that way.  You wonder where to go with him.  I’m not sure there’s a good answer.

Q.  Off Davis Cup.  If Nadal manages to get to Federer, what do you expect from Rafa?
CAPTAIN COURIER:  Don’t you expect the same from Rafa every time he goes to play?

Q.  Effort‑wise, yeah, but I’m talking more about form, coming back after seven months.
CAPTAIN COURIER:  Well, I haven’t seen him play out in Indian Wells yet.  Maybe you can tell me.  How is he moving?  Is he moving aggressively, sliding into his backhand, screeching to stops, or is he moving old school and taking that extra step?

Q.  I thought against Ryan he doesn’t trust the hard courts as much.  Maybe it will be a bigger occasion against Gulbis today.  Did you see Acapulco and were you impressed by that?
CAPTAIN COURIER:  I didn’t see Acapulco.  I saw Chile.  He looked tentative there.  He didn’t look quick off the step.  He was getting beaten by dropshots, which I thought is totally normal.
He should be different by now.  But, yeah, today will be a good indication.  If he’s moving aggressively, expect a rough match.  If he’s playing two competitors, his body and Roger Federer, that’s going to be tough.
TIM CURRY:  I want to thank everybody for joining us.  Jim, thank you for your time.  Official team announcement will be 10 days prior to the start of play.  We will talk to you from Miami.  Thank you.

Tennis Panorama News participates in many tennis media conference calls. “On The Call” serves to give readers an inside view of tennis news.

Share

“On The Call” With ESPN’s Darren Cahill and Chris Evert on The 2013 Australian Open

Chris EvertDarren Cahill

(January 9, 2013) On Tuesday, Jan. 8, ESPN tennis analysts Darren Cahill and Chris Evert spoke with media about the Australian Open, tennis’ first Major of the year, on ESPN2 and ESPN3 starting Sunday, January 13, through the finals two weeks later. This press release has all the details.

 

Highlights from the conference call:

 

Q. Watching Serena and seeing what shape she’s in, watching what she’s done early in the season, is there a chance she could win the calendar slam? I know it’s hard to do. Obviously she has to stay healthy, which is a question. Looking at the way she is right now, certainly seems she might want to do that. What do you guys think?

CHRIS EVERT: Is it possible? Absolutely. It’s absolutely possible. I think you nailed it when you said the thing with Serena is not only her health but her motivation. I think she’s got the motivation, there’s no doubt about it, because she’s been out of the game so many different times, either for injuries or for other interests in her life, whatever, so she’s still a fresh older player. So I don’t think that motivation will be a factor.

 

To stay healthy in this day and age is, as we’ve seen Nadal and other players, I think more difficult, especially for someone like Serena who is such a physical player and has a tendency to get injured. When she’s on, she’s unbeatable. She’s dominant and unbeatable. I don’t know if anybody can really stop her. But you have to remember that we’re talking Grand Slams in the same sentence, and they’re two-week tournaments and have always provided surprises for us.

 

So the big question is for those two-week periods, can she keep the high level of focus and fitness for 14 days in a row. There’s no easy matches anymore, as we saw last year here when she lost, and also last year at the French when she lost. You got to start out 90% to 100% from the first match.

 

But is it possible? It’s absolutely possible. Do I think it will happen? I have my doubts that it would happen only because she is human.

 

DARREN CAHILL: I agree with that. I think at the moment she’s playing a level or two above the opposition. She’s a stronger, faster athlete than she was maybe three or four years ago. I think she’s a more intelligent tennis player now. I think the fact she’s been looking to take other people on, other people’s advice, has helped her tennis. I feel like she’s always learning. I think it’s a great example for everybody, that even once you reach your 30s there’s still ways to improve your tennis. That’s why Federer has been so good over the years and with Andre lasted until he was 36 inside the top 10. He was a student of the game and was continuing to try to get the most out of himself.

 

I agree with Chrissie. The reason so few people have won the Grand Slam is because it’s such a very difficult thing to do, different surfaces, different balls, different challenges along the way, stumbling blocks along the way, they’re enormous. Some of them you do see, some of them we don’t see. But a fit and healthy Serena absolutely has a chance. I think if anybody can do it on either side, Serena can do it.

 

Q. Can I ask you what you’ve seen from Sloane Stephens this year? What are your impressions of her coming back this year?

CHRIS EVERT: Well, I think that last year really helped her as far as experience. She went into last year with these big eyes, you know. She was a novice. She was finally on the big stage, on stadium courts. I think it was an awakening for her. It was like a dress rehearsal for her. Now I think she’s had that experience behind her and it seems to me that she’s moving better and she’s also more relaxed in the position that she’s in, you know, in the top 50 in the world. She certainly was one of the more touted players as a junior. I think there are a lot of expectations. I think finally now she’s mature, she’s calmed down. I for one think she does have the talent to win a Grand Slam title. So I think she’s on the upward swing.

 

DARREN CAHILL: I agree with that as well. We see a couple of kids, male and female, come through every year that to me have top 10 written all over them. Sloane is one of those players. I feel she’s matured in the last 12 months. Her game is great. It’s always been good. I feel like she’s got that personality that expects to be in the top 10, and that’s half the battle, feeling like you belong on the big stage, you belong playing the greatest players in the world.

We even saw that last week in Brisbane, when she was playing Serena, she maybe gave Serena her toughest match of the week. Even in conversations with her coach, you can see it’s a confidence, not an arrogance, it’s a confidence that, Okay, when everything comes together, when she gets a little bit faster and stronger, becomes a more intelligent tennis player, this is going to be her stage.

 

You just have to play a little bit of a waiting game with a player like her because she has a lot of weapons. She needs to find the best ways to utilize those weapons. Maybe that might come in three months, maybe that might come in three years, but there’s no question she has top 10 written all over her and can certainly win a slam.

 

Q. Could you say the same thing about Laura Robson?

DARREN CAHILL: Absolutely. I think she’s a half a step behind Sloane as far as the development. She’s certainly got a lot of weapons. Laura has improved her movement around the court, which is going to be a big factor with her to deal with the strength of shots, a lot of the top ladies, what they play with in today’s game.

There’s no question Laura has the talent. I don’t think I’ve seen anybody in the ladies’ game that varies the spin the way she can do it. The fact she is a lefty is a slight advantage going forward. She also understands the game extremely well. She certainly has the weapons. But there’s the court speed and the ability to play a little defensive tennis at times that is going to be important for her to evolve and improve. But there’s no question there can be a rivalry there.

 

Q. Back to Serena real quick. She’s done so much in her career, has had an amazing career already. Getting a Grand Slam this year, where would that rank her in terms of all time with Chrissie and Billie Jean and even some of the other international players? Then if y’all could talk a little bit about Ryan Harrison and what he needs to do this year, where he’s at.

CHRIS EVERT: Let me tell you, if she wins four Grand Slams in a row this year, I would think she would be the greatest of all time for the simple reason that, first of all, does she have 14 now, is that what she has?

 

DARREN CAHILL: 15.

 

CHRIS EVERT: She has 15. Anybody who wins a Grand Slam in this era with the level of tennis as high as it is, because the level of tennis gets higher every single year, would currently have to be the greatest player that ever lived. Point-blank, that’s all that needs to be said. She would still be the greatest player that ever lived even if she didn’t win four in a row, in my mind.

 

DARREN CAHILL: I would agree with that, Chrissie. I think in the era we’re playing in, it’s so competitive, so many different countries competing. Look, the game has changed. It’s improved every year. I feel the players now are more professional in turning over every single stone they can, not just on the men’s side but the women’s side as well. If she would go through and win the four majors in a row, that would mean she won six in a row. If she won six in a row, there’s no question in my mind she would be the greatest female player that’s lived.

 

CHRIS EVERT: You asked about Ryan Harrison. Go ahead, Darren, you can take that one.

 

DARREN CAHILL: Yeah, look, I’m a big fan of Ryan’s. There’s talk down here in Australia about Bernard Tomic, how it was last year. He’s a young guy that’s made a bunch of mistakes off the court. Some of those mistakes have come on the court as well with a lack of effort the last two or three months of last year. I’m sure he’s very happy to see the rear-end of 2012 and look forward to 2013. But always the second year on tour is always an extremely tough year for these players. You make a break as a youngster, break into the top 50 in the world, people pay more attention to you. They work out your strengths and weaknesses, they spend more time breaking down your game. All of a sudden, players are coming onto the court to play these kids and they have game plans which they’ve never seen before.

 

The second year on tour is a real learning year for a lot of these players. It’s what happened to Ryan as well. Exactly the same at Bernard Tomic. What would be a pretty good ranking for Bernard Tomic this year, I would have said around 50, because it’s going to be tough to replicate what he did in 2011, and I would say exactly the same for Ryan Harrison. He slipped down a little bit after having a breakthrough in 2011. It’s a learning year for him. I feel that this is a kid that takes the right steps to be as good as he can be.

 

He’s changed coaches a few times. He works incredibly hard off the court. He’s taken on a mentorship with Andy Roddick, which I think is a good thing for him. I think you’ll find in the next few years, with Tomic, Goffin, Raonic is already up there. They’ll be around the top 10 if not in the top 10.

 

If you have a look at the top 20 at the moment, most of these guys are approaching 30, if not 30. The shape of the men’s game is going to change in the next three or four years. These guys need to keep working on their games, staying healthy, getting the best out of their games and they’ll find themselves at the top of the game very soon.

 

CHRIS EVERT: I’d just like to add that I think the men’s game, as far as American men players, was a bit disappointing last year. I think the women’s game, the American women’s game is looking stronger than the men’s. I think Ryan and even Jack Sock, Isner, these players – not to be too critical – but need that hard work ethic where they look and see how a Nadal trains, Djokovic and Federer and Ferrer. The top players are at a different level when it comes to hard work ethic and the training and even the dedication. I think it’s just brutal now. I think that’s got to be one of the things, intangibles as far as, Okay, you got a great game, but how much do you want it and how much are you willing to work for it? I think there’s a lot of talent in those two players I mentioned, Jack Sock and Ryan Harrison. But I think they’ve got to maybe go up a little level as far as their fitness and their hard work ethic.

 

Q A question about Federer and Nadal. Do you think this is going to be the first year in what would be 10 years or more that neither one of them wins a major? What are the chances that neither one of them wins a major this year?

CHRIS EVERT: Oh, heavens. It’s all speculation, isn’t it? I mean, I don’t know how you can say. First of all, Nadal, we don’t even know if he’s going to come back, right? I think it very well could happen. Yes, it very well could happen. But I just think if Nadal gets his act together in February, March, and he gets healthy, he’s pretty invincible on the red clay, even though Djokovic did have a good match with him last year at the French. I think Nadal, he puts all his eggs in one basket when it comes to winning at least that one Grand Slam. I think he’s going to do everything he can to prepare for that one Grand Slam. So in that respect, you know, no, that won’t happen. I mean, I predict Nadal is going to come back and win the French. I think Murray is also going to win a Grand Slam this year, and Djokovic also. And Roger, you can never count Roger Federer out, especially on the grass. But I think, gosh, each year gets a little bit tougher, you know, for him.

I would love to see him win a Grand Slam, but I don’t know. I don’t think you could ever be 100% sure with him.

What do you think, Darren?

 

DARREN CAHILL: I have a question for you in are you willing to go bet against Nadal?

 

Q. I’d never make that bet.

 

DARREN CAHILL: Then you can’t expect us to make that bet!

 

Q. I don’t expect you to. I just see it as the first time in a long time where that’s a possibility. It never even used to be a possibility.

 

DARREN CAHILL: It’s always been a bit of a possibility because these players, the ones that have been chasing Federer and Nadal are so good these days. No question Nadal, I think he’s going to come back and he’s going to be just as strong as he was. It was three years ago at Wimbledon that we were all throwing our hands up. I went through the same thing, patellar tendonitis, not to compare myself with him, it’s in a different world completely, but I understand what he’s going through when it comes to this knee pain. It put me out of the game when I was 25. I was going, you know what, this is going to be tough to get back to the level he was at. Lo and behold, he came back a better tennis player.

 

Anything he achieves on the tennis court is not surprising. Everything Federer achieves on the court is not surprising considering what he does to get the best out of himself and what he’s achieved in the past. I do think you’re right that 2013 might shake the future in the men’s game. We might get an insight as to how the men’s game is going to look at from the next five or six years and beyond from the results in 2013. But there’s no way anybody is going to put a red line through Federer and Nadal just yet.

 

CHRIS EVERT: If I were to be a betting woman, you know, you can never bet against Djokovic on a hard surface, like an Australian or a US Open. And Federer certainly I think is going to be — I think Wimbledon is his goal in his life. And Nadal, the French Open. Murray, he’s going to be the spoiler this year. Somehow he’s going to be the spoiler. He can play great grass court tennis, as we saw last year at Wimbledon. And he’s a great hard court player also. So he’s going to be the one that’s going to be the spoiler, I think.

 

Q. Around the time when Nadal or Federer were winning everything, 2005, 2006, I think everyone saw Murray and Djokovic as strong, probably going to get to the top, the only thing holding them back were these two guys. I don’t know if you would say that now about some of the guys younger than Murray and Djokovic. What do you two think? Is that next generation maybe a little bit behind where this generation was a few years ago or are they coming along okay?

CHRIS EVERT: I’ll just say briefly, because Darren knows a lot more about this than I do, I’ll say briefly I think this is the year, 2013, for these players to emerge. I think we kind of saw hints of it last year.

But especially this year, with Nadal not being 100%, Federer, like I said, as each year goes on, it’s going to be harder and harder for him to be mentally tough for every match. I think this is the year that some new faces are going to pop up, and have to. That’s always been the way it’s gone in tennis.

 

DARREN CAHILL: I agree with that. You’re right, absolutely. This generation of Murray and Djokovic, the one previous in 2005, 2006 that came up, were right there with these guys.

 

I remember a little story actually with Andre. Remember back at the French Open in 2006 when Djokovic got through the quarterfinals, played that match against Nadal. He walked off the court after a couple sets because he was injured. Obviously it was a big thing for the young kid to get through to the quarters. In the after-match press conference he said he felt comfortable on the court against Nadal. That caught the attention of Andre back in 2006. I remember vividly the tournament right before Wimbledon, just before Andre announced it was going to be his last Wimbledon ever, and the US Open was going to be his last tournament, he played an exhibition against Djokovic.

 

Andre said, The kid just played Nadal, right? This is the kid that said he felt like he was the better player at the French, right? I said, Yeah, this is the kid. So walking out from the locker room onto the court, I remember walking next to these guys, and Andre peppered him with questions about his career. This is an 18-, 19-year-old kid that came out and said he felt like he was a better player than Nadal on clay. Obviously I’m paraphrasing him a little bit.

 

Andre peppered him with questions about why he would make such a statement. Novak wasn’t being cocky, he wasn’t being over the top. He basically answered each question with, No, I just felt for this reason, if I could play my game off the backhand side, I have a big pocket. I felt if I could push him back on the backhand side I would make this progress, my forehand down the line, I could make this progress. He answered every one of Andre’s questions like a true pro. That’s the intelligence and the thinking of that generation of player.

 

Now, Murray was exactly the same. You’re right, that generation of player is slightly ahead of the generation we see right now. I think Nadal, Murray, because Nadal is only a year or two older than those guys, but Nadal, Murray and Novak was a unique circumstance for men’s tennis to get those three guys into the game. But they are special tennis players that you rarely see. We haven’t got those generation of players coming through. We have some really good players. But it might be the generation after that that comes through and pushes them. But you are right, they are a level ahead of what we have at the moment.

 

CHRIS EVERT: The four men are so dominant, they’re so close. They beat each other. They just keep beating each other. Nothing is predictable when they play one another, whereas that’s so different in the women’s game.

Like you said, Darren, they can sort of rationalize and speak intelligently, have intelligent strategy against the other men. In the women’s game, I think the top players look at playing Serena, and they’re hoping that she just has a bad day. It’s hard to figure out what the winning strategy is against her. That’s where it’s different.

 

Q. In Abu Dhabi, Janko Tipsarevic described Andy Murray as a different animal. Have you seen a difference in the way Andy carries himself on the court, his attitude? Can you see him going on to win multiple majors this year potentially?

DARREN CAHILL: Look, I do see a slight difference on the court with his attitude. I feel like he spent 12 months now with Ivan. He knows exactly what the plan is. This time last year, it was a little bit, Let’s look and see how this goes. Obviously it was a big step for him to take someone on like Ivan. He knew what media attention it would gain. He never won a Grand Slam tournament before. Obviously all eyes were going to be on the Murray/Lendl partnership.

 

They’re 12 months down the road now, they have an Olympic gold medal under their belt, a US Open under their belt. I see a little bit more swagger on the court. It doesn’t mean anything when it come to playing these top guys. It means he’s not focusing on that one major; he’s focusing now on multiple. There’s no question he’s capable of winning multiple slams.

 

Two or three years ago in 2010 when Novak was going through the rough spot, the serve was all over the place, the forehand was all over the place, he was struggling in the heat. Chris Fowler was doing a tournament with Brad Gilbert and myself, posed a question to us, if we could go back to coaching, who would we take on at that particular time, and both of us in unison said Novak Djokovic. The reason for it is we saw the most improvement coming from someone’s game in the top 10 from. Credit to his coach, Marian Vajda, to get him to where he is. I look at Andy Murray’s game a bit the same. Even though he’s achieved what he’s achieved, there’s still an enormous amount of achievement that can come from Andy Murray’s game. I think if they stay together the next couple years, I think you’ll see him realize a lot of his dreams and win more major championships.

 

Q. Do you think Ivan would be the key then?

DARREN CAHILL: Yeah, I think it’s important. I think stability in a relationship, in a player and coach partnership, is more important than people realize. The message sometimes is the same message. There has to be that belief and that trust between the player and the coach. You don’t get that from spending a couple of months together; you get that from spending years together.

 

I feel like in the next couple years, if they can stay together, it will only be good for Andy. Obviously the big question mark is the amount of travel is takes on Ivan with his family. The fact that he’s stepped up and committed to Andy to do this job, it was a little bit surprising for me that he would do it. But also I think it brought a smile to everybody’s face in tennis that somebody that achieved so much in tennis in the game would be so willing to invest in somebody else’s career. It’s great for everybody on a whole and specifically for Andy.

 

CHRIS EVERT: I think Ivan Lendl was the perfect, perfect fit for Andy Murray because Andy Murray’s attitude has completely changed and his demeanor on the court. It still shows up now, but Andy used to be a very emotional and very passionate and very impulsive, would just get down on himself so easily. Then you would have Lendl on the other side known for being stoic and unemotional. He didn’t let anything bother him.

 

I just think that nowadays when Andy is about to erupt, he’ll look over and Ivan will give him a look like, Don’t you even think about starting that kind of crap, you know. And Andy Murray will just go back to being more serious.

I think temperament-wise he’s really helped him. I think that’s exploded into his game. He’s just playing so much better. I think they need to stay together. I don’t know why they wouldn’t. I don’t even know where Andy Murray would be today if it wasn’t for Lendl because I think he significantly changed him and changed his temperament and his whole personality out there.

 

Q. The weather. It’s usually very hot in Australia. It’s particularly hot this year. Do you think that may play a bigger factor this year than in previous years at the Open?

CHRIS EVERT: Conditioning is always a factor. It’s 100% a factor. Especially coming off of everybody had a rest. Who knows, some players went skiing, some players really did take time off and are kind of working their way into the beginning of the year. Some already have worked hard and are very fit. I think conditioning and fitness is definitely going to be a factor with the heat. You’re going to have some players that are going to fizzle and some players that aren’t going to be able to cope as well as others. It’s just a matter of conditioning for the players.

 

DARREN CAHILL: I think that’s also why you see so many players get down here much earlier than they used to with the Australian Open. It’s to get used to the climate in Australia. Everyone is coming from Europe or America. The weather over there is pretty average at the moment. Ana Ivanovic was down here on the 21st of December to get ready for the Australia summer. Daniela Hantuchova was down here two or three weeks before Christmas to get ready. Most of the players are either doing their pre-season in Australia or they’re coming out before Christmas to make sure they hit the ground running. By the time they get to the Australian Open, they are well used to the heat, if they have to play matches in those 35, 36 degree days.

 

Q. I wanted to go back to the Andy Murray/Ivan Lendl partnership. Are there technical differences that Lendl has made in his game so far or would you just say it’s temperament-wise?

CHRIS EVERT: I think definitely there’s been some technical changes. But to me it’s mostly been attitude.

Go ahead, Darren, about the technical.

 

DARREN CAHILL: You know, I spent a lot of time with both these guys, especially with Andy back in 2011. It’s a little difficult for me to comment on the Lendl/Murray partnership because I played a small part in it. I’m sitting back now wondering how it was going to go last year. Like everybody else, I’m happy that it worked. Getting any real information out of Ivan is like pulling blood from a stone. The guy keeps everything really close to his chest. That’s what good coaches do. They reveal little bits of information but nothing too specific that is going to give you an insight as to what they’re actually working on because they don’t want to give any ammunition to their main rival.

 

Nadal doesn’t tell us what he’s working on when it comes to the serve. Federer doesn’t tell us what he’s working on when he’s working on the backhand, the net game, or being more aggressive. These guys don’t give you much and the coaches don’t give you much as well. Sitting on the outside looking in, there’s no question that he’s trying to get more weight behind that forehand side of Andy. If you go back to tape three years ago and watch Andy Murray hit forehands compared to the way he’s hitting them today, there’s a stark difference in the amount of weight behind each and every one of those forehands and his willingness to take that forehand up the line earlier in the point. That creates much more open court for you. While you can do it well, you can also look to the direction in which Andy is hitting the second serve. Used to hit it the same spot in the court every time. Now he’s moving around the service box to possibly get free points off the second serve. He didn’t serve great, even though he won the tournament in Brisbane. On the whole, there’s also a lot more miles per hour behind that second serve than there used to be. The first serve is now considered a big weapon and one of the biggest shots in the game. There’s no question that he’s targeted four or five different areas in Andy’s game. Again, that takes time to work on. You can’t fix that stuff in one week, in two weeks, in one month. It takes a lot of time. I think you’re starting to see the benefits of late last year, the Olympics, US Open time. All that came together for Murray and Lendl.

 

CHRIS EVERT: I think with Lendl, the attitude is a big thing, but I also think second would be he’s a more intelligent player. I think Lendl really helps him with strategy with these players. I saw that when he played Djokovic, when he plays Federer. Actually, he was playing Djokovic last year at the Australian Open. He’s just slicing his backhand, giving him no pace. That was something that had been talked about with Lendl.

I think Ivan is really one for exposing what weaknesses these top players have. So I think he’s become a more intelligent player as well as a more focused and more calm player on the court. Like Darren said, that’s why I gave him the question, Lendl doesn’t say anything. You are not going to get anything out of him (laughter).

 

Q. A lot of the Andy Murray stuff has been covered, but a quick one. Darren, how do you see the head-to-head between him and Djokovic if these are the two strongest guys? Who do you think has the upper hand mentally between the pair of them? Considering the kind of improvement you see is possible in Andy’s game, would you put a number on the amount of Grand Slams potentially he could be winning in his career?

DARREN CAHILL: Look, I think it’s a little bit, as I mentioned before, in the men’s game, it’s going to be really interesting how everything plays out in the next three or four years because of the fact that we see so many guys in the top 20 around that 30-year mark. These two guys might be completely dominating every single major like Nadal and Federer did. I think it’s impossible to put a number on it.

 

I just know from Andy’s perspective, even though Federer and Nadal were dominating the game a number of years ago, the guy he spent more time thinking about was Novak. These two guys, they’ve known each other since they were 12, 13 years of age. They were born a few days apart. This was his main rival, was Novak Djokovic. They both knew they were going to be good tennis players. Who knew how good they were going to be. This was his measuring stick for success or failure. He had to be competitive with Novak Djokovic.

I think you saw him go through a little period when Novak came out in 2011 and dominated, you saw some frustration in Andy’s game, in his demeanor on the court, the way he handled himself. He made the changes to fix that up by employing Lendl.

 

Who knows how much that win at the US Open is going to help Andy in the big situations. We get the Australian Open to see that for the first time. This is the first time Andy has ever walked into a major championship as a major winner, as a Grand Slam winner. Who knows how much confidence that will give him.

 

Now, we’re in unknown territory here for the next 12 months for many, many reasons. Novak is really the only sure thing we know at the moment. That is that he’s going to put himself in a position to win majors time and time again. The rest of it we don’t know. We don’t know how Federer is going to be, how good he’s going to be. We don’t know if Nadal is going to come back. We don’t know how much that US Open win is going to help Murray. I think that’s why it makes this year a real fascinating year for the men’s game.

 

CHRIS EVERT: You’re right, it’s an unknown about Federer because he put so much into winning Wimbledon last year. You wonder how much it drained him. The other thing, Djokovic has an advantage over Andy Murray. Unfortunately, when you know somebody so well, you have an advantage. Djokovic has played him so many times, has seen him lose his temper, seen him lose focus, get ruffled and riled on the court. I think as much as Andy Murray has improved, I still think Djokovic, when he plays him, he has still that little mental edge because he knows he still could erupt. Andy Murray, again, he’s improved so much. Hopefully we won’t see that. If we don’t see that, then I think Andy Murray definitely will reach a higher pinnacle in his game.

 

Q. This question is about the game itself. This year it seems that the umpires are more strict about enforcing the 25-second time limit between points. Do you believe it to be good for the game or do you think it will hurt the players that will have to rush themselves now?

CHRIS EVERT: Oh, that’s an interesting question. I’m a rule person. I mean, there are a lot of players that have taken advantage of that rule and have gotten away with it. So I think it’s good to enforce the same rule on everybody.

DARREN CAHILL: This generation of tennis player, it’s not their fault that they’ve been allowed to change the rules, this time violation rule in the last five to 10 years because the rule hasn’t been enforced. This particular generation of tennis player doesn’t understand playing to a time limit. We’ve had 45, 50, 55 seconds between points. We were never able to get away with that. While it’s not their fault, this generation of tennis players is not the first generation to play long rallies. You look to Connors, Wilander, Lendl, they used to play just as long matches, and maybe the game is more physical now, but it’s become more of a physical game, taxing on the body, sliding on the hard courts, whatnot. But it’s not the first generation of players to play incredibly long rallies, where they have the heart rate up around 190 after every point. Because they don’t know it, because that rule has never been enforced, it’s a bit of a shock to the system for these guys.

 

But I believe for the good of the game, for the game moving forward, not just from a spectator point of view, but also from a television point of view, even from a player point of view, because the fittest and the strongest will benefit from this, that time violation has to be enforced.

 

I have a little flexibility with it. I feel like maybe 25 seconds might be a little too fast. 20 seconds at the Grand Slams, that’s just ridiculous. I believe 20 seconds is going to be enforced again. They don’t actually enforce it at the Grand Slams. This is an ATP thing, where the ATP is becoming much more stricter on the time violations.

I think there’s an easy way around this. After you hit a serve, it’s an ace, no problem, the umpire calls the score, starts the clock, there’s a pregnant pause in the time between when the crowd applauds, 5 to 10 seconds, the umpire calls the score, then you start the clock. At the moment, no matter if it’s a one-shot rally or 50-shot rally, as soon as that point is dead, the clock is being started. I think there’s a little adjustment that could be made. But I applaud the ATP for taking the stance. I believe this is a good thing for the game of tennis and tennis moving forward, no question about it.

 

CHRIS EVERT: Boy, you put a lot of time into researching that one, huh (laughter)?

 

DARREN CAHILL: More time violations given out in the last couple weeks than all last year. A real big shock to the players. All of a sudden they don’t know what’s going on. A couple players have lost a couple of first serves in big moments. I think Baghdatis lost a first serve for a time violation in Brisbane. It’s been a real shock to the players, but it’s not their fault. They’ve never played to a clock before. It’s going to take a little time for the players to adjust.

 

Q. I would like to ask you a couple of questions about Caroline Wozniacki. Do you think she’s able to win the Australian Open and how do you see her year in general after a really bad 2012?

CHRIS EVERT: I think that’s a question that we’re all wondering. Anybody who admires her, there’s really no harder worker out there than Caroline. She trains so hard. You can tell she wants it so much. She’s had trouble with the coaching situation. She had her dad, then she tried two coaches, that didn’t work out, so now she’s back with her dad again. I think that’s probably a good idea. You have to get the person back that you feel the most comfortable with. And I think it’s just obvious to everybody and to her what she has to do, and that basically is just to hug the baseline a little more, take the ball earlier.

 

She’s playing the tennis of the last generation. I don’t mean that in a bad way. She never misses a ball, she’s consistent. She’s got great feel, great concentration. But the fact of the matter is she’s giving her opponent too much time on the other side of the net, when she could be offensive. She has to take a few more risks off the second serve. Anything inside the baseline she should go for. It’s a tough task for her. You know, I think her goals have to be she has to take baby steps. Right now she’s not looking to be No. 1. She should be looking to be in the top 5, top 6, work her way to be back in the top 5. That would be a reasonable goal for her. She has everything else. But I think her game, her thinking is going to have to change and get a little more offensive and a little more aggressive.

 

DARREN CAHILL: I agree. You know I know Caroline quite well and I think the world of her. I think the game is better off if she’s in the top 5, pushing for majors. I think she’s good enough to eventually win one, no question about it. I think she’s got herself into a little bit of a rut at the moment because she doesn’t know what type of game she should be playing. I agree with Chrissie. She builds her game on making her side of the court feel so small to everybody. At the moment she’s trying to be the player that she’s not really comfortable with.

 

You have to evolve as a tennis player; you have to get better. She needs to pump up her serve. She needs to find spaces in the court, not being three meters behind the baseline and wait for the game to come to her. You have to become better at her game. You can’t go away from what’s made her a great player.

 

About Lendl and Murray, stability, there has to be stability in the camp. I think you’ll find that Piotr is a very intelligent man. I think you’ll find that he gets a bit of a hard time because of his whole coaching scenario. But Caroline is just as strong minded as what Piotr is and she wants Piotr around. She wants her dad in charge of her career. If that’s the case, call her shot and say, This is the way it’s going to be. Stop messing around with the trial coaches. She has the ability to get some advice off other coaches in the game as well through the adidas program. But get that stability that she’s looking for.

 

I think the other factor, she fell into a little bit of a trap that a lot of players do when they have success on tour. She made a change to equipment. She was the No. 1 player in the world. All of a sudden you get these major contracts being offered to you. The two things, unless it’s going to do your game a lot of good, that you should never mess with, I believe, it’s my personal opinion, I talk about this all the time, never mess with the shoes you’re wearing and never mess with the racquets that you’re using. They are the two most important pieces of equipment that are going to determine how many you’re going to win and how many you’re going to lose. Any change you make to that, it takes time. You can never turn a career around because of that particular change. I would have loved to see her stay with what she had and keep evolving her game from there.

 

Look, I can point to a hundred examples where a change of equipment has been a negative for a player. I can maybe point to a handful where it was a good one. A good one last year was Sara Errani. She handed back a big check for her racquet sponsor because she found a piece of equipment that was better for her game. Look what happened to her. Unless you find a piece of equipment that you know is going to be better for your tennis game, stay with what you have.

 

CHRIS EVERT: I agree. Darren, you made a good point about, I think she does feel comfortable with her dad. You know what, she tried it the other way. She went past her safety zone and she went to two coaches and she tried it and it didn’t work. So now she’s back with her dad. My dad was my main coach for my whole career. But I had hitting partners. I had other coaches come in and out, travel to tournaments with me. But my dad was my main coach. And I think she makes that decision and now we’ve got to respect that.

 

The other thing is, you have to change with the era. When I played, when Martina played, we played through three different eras. I started with Margaret Court, then I went through Martina, then I ended up with Steffi and Monica. I had to change my game and I ended up being a better player than when I was starting out and when I was No. 1. You have to be flexible, you have to really understand that the game has changed and you’ve got to make those minute, and they are, you keep the main focus of your game and the main strengths, the base of your game, but you do have to change certain elements of it to really play in that era. And that’s what she maybe hasn’t adapted as well as she could have.

 

Q. I also wanted to ask both of you guys where you feel Rafa is right now. Should we be worried about Rafa or not? What other girls are there that we should watch? Petra certainly has had a slow start. Who else can challenge?

CHRIS EVERT: I’m going to give you the girls and Darren can do the Rafa. I mean, I have one eyebrow up when it comes to Rafa because I don’t know. He’s been out of the game really since the French. Even at Wimbledon he played, what, one or two matches. That’s a long time. So, yeah, I think everybody is concerned.

 

As far as the American girls, I think we’ve had four girls do extreme think well at the start of the girls. Madison Keys, I like to mention her because she’s had two big wins. She had two upsets actually. She’s in Sydney right now in the quarterfinals. I mention her because she, like Serena, is a power player. I think her serve even rivals Serena’s. I think it could be just as good if it isn’t now. So I think we’ve got to watch her.

 

Jamie Hampton, I have to give her kudos because her work ethic is unbelievable, she’s a fighter.

 

Then Lauren Davis, she had a big win over the 27th-ranked player in the world, Cirstea. I think between Lauren Davis, Jamie Hampton, Madison and Sloane, starting out the year the way they have, I would like to personally keep my eyes on them.

 

Q. Then we can watch Taylor Townsend.

CHRIS EVERT: Then there’s Taylor Townsend and CoCo. And Donna Vekic, being 16 years old and being in the main draw of Australia, I think that merits having a look at her also.

 

Q. Is there hope for CoCo?

CHRIS EVERT: There’s always hope for CoCo, but CoCo has to get in better shape. She’s got to drop a few pounds and get into better shape and she knows it.

 

Then I’ll throw in Maria Sanchez who went from 800 to 127 in a year, too. She’s an American player that graduated from SC. She’s out there on the tour, too. She was actually 800 last summer. At the end of this year, she’s 127. She’s taken a big jump. She’s an American player. But I think between the American players and Ashleigh Barty and Donna, I think it’s looking really exciting.

 

Q. So the American women look promising coming up?

CHRIS EVERT: Yes, because there’s 10 in the top 100, and that’s more than any other country. I think Russia might have 10. So it’s looking good.

 

Q. Darren, can you address the mysterious Rafa.

DARREN CAHILL: You know what, for me I look at him and we never quite know the stuff that flows through the veins of champions. It’s a little bit different from us normal people. I feel like whilst there’s a big question mark about his game, I know he’s been out for seven or eight months now, this is a guy that you can just see it in his eyes when he steps onto a tennis court, you can see it when he’s put into a position when somebody is threatening him. The guy hates to lose.

 

He won’t put himself back on a tennis court unless he’s ready to win. The guy will do everything he can to get back to where he was. If he does come back, he’s not coming back to be top 10 in the world, he’s not coming back for the money, he’s not coming back for anything but to win majors. When he does come back, and hopefully he will, he will be 100%. He will put himself into a position that he feels like physically he can compete with these best players in the world again.

 

So that’s why I feel it was a little blessing in disguise, I know it’s not perfect for him, but blessing in disguise that maybe he’s not restarting his career in Australia because it’s a brutal thing for him to do on the hard courts. Looks like he’s going to play his first tournament in Acapulco, a clay court event, to ease his way back into the game.

But make no mistake, if Rafa steps back onto the court, he’s stepping back onto the court to win tennis matches, simple as that.

 

CHRIS EVERT: Also history has shown, if you look at Serena, players that have had injuries and taken time off, they come back with more of a vengeance, more passion. They appreciate their health and life so much more.

If he can get himself back physically at 100%, he could be a better player, no doubt about it.

Share

“On The Call” with John and Patrick McEnroe

Patrick McEnroe

On Friday ESPN’s John and Patrick McEnroe discussed the US Open on a media conference call which begins Monday, August 27, with extensive coverage on ESPN2 and ESPN3.

 

Q.  Doing a story on your brother, Mark.  For both of you what does he bring to his job at the academy?  And what part do you expect him to play in the debate about the future of American tennis and where the next great tennis start is going to come from?

PATRICK McENROE:  Well, he can get in line to get into the debate.  I mean, we are all enjoying that.  Mark has been the big man until the middle for many years and I’m happy he’s in the game.  I’m very happy that John got himself into the game.  John put his money where his mouth is by doing his own thing and his own academy and that’s awesome for tennis and New York in general.

 

For Mark, he’s a pretty darned good tennis player, so the fact that he’s working alongside John is great for him and great for the family.  And I know John feels pretty good having him alongside, and I know I feel pretty good when I take my little daughter up there for lessons and he takes care of it, so it’s all good.

 

JOHN McENROE:  At my club over in Randall’s Island; it’s nice to have someone you trust who also loves the sport.  As Patrick pointed out, being the middle brother, he can bridge the gap of Patrick and I on any issues that I think in the long run is going to help all of us.  I’m looking forward to hopefully the situation where all of us work together, not just the two of us.

Q.  Given his background, Wall Street lawyer and working in hedge funds and stuff like that ‑‑

PATRICK McENROE:  I’m not going to hold that against him.

Q.  Do you think that helps in bringing in a different perspective a little bit?

JOHN McENROE:  Well, I think that strictly from the managerial standpoint, he’s a smart guy and being a lawyer, he can help me with things that other, quote, unquote, tennis guys wouldn’t be able to.  As far as whether or not it helps in the sort of world of tennis, I honestly can’t say that you can make a determination that because he was around Wall Street or involved with hedge funds that that necessarily makes him better equipped to deal with the politics that goes along with tennis or the sport itself.  I mean, I think that’s a bit of a stretch.

Q.  I wanted to ask you for your thoughts on the men’s field, in particular, of the top three seeds, who do you see as the favorite, and who among them do you think has more at stake or maybe just a word about what each respectively kind of has at stake in the last slam of the year.

JOHN McENROE:  Yeah, I was just going to say that to me, the three of them ‑‑ I almost think that you can make an argument for all three.  I think it’s very close.  They are sort of all ‑‑ it would be hard to pick one of them right now, because you can make an argument for any one of them.  I can say that as far as what’s at stake, I think Murray has got the most at stake, because, yes, he’s won this Olympic thing, but I think it’s pretty universally understood that it’s not quite ‑‑ while it’s become more important obviously in the fact that it was at Wimbledon was helpful, it’s not thought of I think in the same way as the slams.

 

So I don’t think the burr is off him but I’m hoping that it can break the ice so to speak and he can win some slams.  I think he has the most to loss and the most to gain at this point.  Before the Olympics, it was between the three guys, you know, obviously Rafa is not here; who would win and then become No. 1.

 

But now the way it pans out, it’s conceivable that Murray could make an argument were he to win this, and then have a strong season, and, say, win the Masters, there’s a possibility that you could say he’s the best player in the world this year.  To me that’s an unbelievable upside.  In some ways Roger has accomplished ‑‑ I thought he would win another major and be back at No. 1.  He’s proved a lot of people wrong there.

 

Djokovic obviously has this year, greatest year in 40 years, and he’s not been really at the same level.  Yet, he’s still for a guy who has really had not as good a year as he had last year, is still in the mix; if he were to win this, he could be No. 1 again and will be No. 1.  So that’s quite a nice thing for him, as well.

 

PATRICK McENROE:  I think that obviously this year, in particular, I think it’s pretty cool that he’s got No. 1 really up for grabs in The Open at the first time in a while. As to John’s point, career‑wise, Murray has the most at stake because he just has not won one.  But for a different year, they have all got a lot at stake because you can easily make the case that if any one of the three wins it, they will and should be No. 1 for the year.  Obviously there’s still tennis to be played post the Open, but certainly either Roger or Djokovic win this, they are No. 1 this year because they have won two Majors.

 

I think Roger is probably a slight favorite, just because I think that having won Wimbledon again and gotten back to No. 1, I feel like watching him in Cincinnati, which I know is slightly different than a US Open, that he’s sort of playing with no pressure at all.  He’s sort of playing with house money, because he has not won one for so long, and to keep ‑‑ for him, he kind of got the monkey off his back and then he had not won for three years.

 

So I think when he plays with that sort of freedom and abandon, he’s very, very dangerous.  You know, he’s obviously the most talented player that I’ve ever seen, so I think when he can play with that kind of freedom, it makes him that much tougher to beat.

 

Now, that being said, I think the conditions here with the tournament being back‑loaded for the last couple of days, I think that makes it a little bit trickier for him with potentially to potentially beat Murray and then Novak back‑to‑back on hard courts with a lot of heat or maybe wind or rain delays, things like that.  So I think that’s sort of the X‑factor for Federer.  But from a pure tennis standpoint of what I’ve seen the last three months, I would call him the favorite.

Q.  It seems like this year, Federer, there’s just been a little bit of a flip flop.  Djokovic was obviously so dominant last year and Federer, we were talking about, will he ever win another one; and now it seems like he’s No. 1 again.  Do you think that’s more that Federer is playing better or Djokovic is not playing as well?  And the second question I wanted to ask is about Serena, and obviously once again, as we always say, when she feels like it and when she plays well, there’s nobody that can beat her and all this.  What do you think of this Kerber, this German woman who has been playing well; do you think that she’s someone we should be watching or do you think Serena is just going to kind of roll over everybody again?

JOHN McENROE:  I’ll go first.  Federer is playing better, I believe, and Djokovic has dropped off a little bit.  And I think Federer prefers a Djokovic match up to Nadal, and it’s the opposite, interestingly enough, with Djokovic.  He seems to prefer to play Nadal right now than Roger.  Some of it was timing, and obviously there’s always a little bit of luck that goes into it, such as the roof closing when they played at Wimbledon, things of that nature.

 

But the match‑up seems to suit Roger, and he seems to be more comfortable in that situation.  And it was hard to keep up, for anyone to keep up that level, because Djokovic had pushed all year towards becoming the first guy since Laver to hold all four slams at the same time.  When he lost that final where he almost had a chance to get back in and win, I think there was a letdown.

 

So, yeah, I think there’s been a shift, but Djokovic, as Patrick rightly pointed out, would still be No. 1 if he wins this.  I think he’s really sort of had some time to sort of get over the frustration, not a lot of time obviously, because the Olympics definitely complicates things.  But he had a couple tough losses there and lost to Roger at Wimbledon.  He sucked it up and played a couple of the hard courts and he’s got a week here.  I think he’s definitely feeling like he should win this thing.

 

As far as Kerber, I’ve watched Kerber play for the last couple years and she’s someone to me who is an extremely smart tennis player.  She knows the game and she knows how to sort of ‑‑ she’s like sort of a natural tennis thinker.

 

However; if, Serena, to me, is mentally and physically ready to play and into it, I don’t think there’s a player alive that can beat her right now.  Now, of course she’s only won one slam in the last few years, so it’s not as if she’s been ‑‑ I think there’s been seven straight different women winning slams, I believe, or something close to that.  And Kerber is someone who is one of those that if she catches you on an off‑day can beat anyone, but I don’t see her with the type of firepower needed to go all the way.

 

PATRICK McENROE:  I think Serena is obviously the favorite, but I think there’s more that can go wrong in the US Open for her than certainly at Wimbledon.  And what I mean by that is she’s ‑‑ it’s interesting reading her article in the New York Times magazine that she’s got a little something in her head about things going wrong at the US Open, whether it’s the grunting or the line call or the point penalty, etc.

 

So that’s not a good thing for her.  And I think probably more importantly even than that, even though she said she loves hard court and it’s her favorite surface, I think her weakness, obviously there are not many, but when she gets inconsistent can show up a little bit more on a hard court than playing on a grass court where her serve is that much more magnified.  Wind can also hurt her a little bit.

As John said she’s the best out there but seven straight matches ‑‑ even the first week of Wimbledon, you know, she very nearly lost a couple of times.  So if that kind of thing happens again at the US Open, she can be in trouble.  But Kerber is certainly someone that I think can be around in the second week, but I’m amazed at her negative attitude out there that she gets so negative, and yet she’s still able to compete.  I think if she could somehow get a little more positive, that might help her once she gets to the quarters and semis.  And obviously there’s some other young players.

Q.  A lot of people are talking about the change Andy Murray is going through under the guidance of Ivan Lendl.  So my question is about coaching.  What do you need for a player to find the right coach?  Is it a connection that can change a player’s mentality, and can a coach have that much impact?

JOHN McENROE:  Yeah, that’s a great question.  I’m not sure there is an answer, and it obviously depends on an individual and the timing of it.  I mean, Murray has been through a number of coaches, and a number of world‑class coaches.   So this could have ‑‑ it seems to have come at a time, a pretty critical point in his career, where perhaps Ivan had the credibility of someone who had been in a similar situation as Andy, having not won his first four Grand Slams, losing in the finals, and then being one of the great players of all time, Ivan Lendl.

 

So sometimes a player needs to sort of have someone who has been there, done that.  And other times, you could look at other players in the Top‑10, where they have had the same coaches since they were teenagers or even before, and they feel a comfort level.  So it’s wildly unpredictable; when Paul Annacone first started working with Roger, most people assumed he would try to get Roger become more aggressive, particularly against Nadal, maybe come in and take an earlier volley more.

 

Very, very subtle changes; it took years ‑‑ to me, it seems like the reason why Roger won Wimbledon this year was in the finals against Murray, it was one of the greatest volleying performances I’ve ever seen him have, considering he had not been volleying that well beforehand.  So would you say that’s an influence of Paul Annacone finally, or not; it’s hard to say, is the bottom line.

 

But certainly there’s been occasions where a coach can have a fairly significant impact.  There’s other times where you’ve seen some of the other players play without coaches.  Tsonga is without a coach and he’s playing the best tennis of his career.  Federer played for the better part of a few years winning Grand Slams without a coach.  So this is something that is hard to say exactly, but certainly, there’s a handful of people out there that have made a difference with some of the top players.

PATRICK McENROE:  Oh, there’s no doubt it (a new coach) can (help).  I only heard the second half of John’s answer, and I certainly agree a hundred percent with what he said.  Absolutely there’s cases where a coach can give you a burst of energy.  Sometimes you just need to hear a different voice.  Obviously players that are in the top ‑‑ winning tennis matches their entire life.  So they are used to that.  They are used to winning.  But sometimes they just need a different push.

 

In the case of someone like a Murray, he’s someone that brought a little something to the table.  Lendl has experience.  Really, as John said, it depends on the individual and it depends on the relationship between the coach and the player.  I mean, you spend so much time with that person that it’s not necessarily always about X’s and O’s.  It’s about the relationship and the trust that you have and where you are at this stage of your career that you’re willing to say, okay, I’m going to listen to somebody like that.

Q.  Wondering about Andy Murray, do you see anyone early in his run in the draw who could cause a problem?  I know he’s kind of got that out of his system and is going deep in most Majors recently.  Are there any dangers for him early in the draw that you see, any other big guns, any dangerous for them early in the draw?

JOHN McENROE:  Well, I don’t have the draw in front of me but I believe he’s slated to play Raonic in the 16s.  So that would be an example of someone that potentially, I think, could be a problem for any top player.  Just like a guy like John Isner could be if he’s on his game.  These guys that have huge firepower and get you out of your comfort zone.  So that’s the type of a person on a hot day or an off‑day where he’s serving big could provide problems for him or any player.  I look at a player like that and I think to myself, that could be a future top‑five player.          Patrick, do you know who his quarter is?

 

PATRICK McENROE:  I don’t have that in front of me either.

JOHN McENROE:  I believe it’s Tsonga, if I’m not mistaken.  Those are obviously matches in his record, I’m pretty sure it’s Tsonga, and I believe if that is the case, that that would be someone who he has a good record against.  Yeah, of course, he’s the type of player that could obviously beat anyone on a given day, but I think he’s only one in six events against Andy.

 

But more than who he’s playing, it’s actually how ‑‑ I don’t know if there’s anything to what’s happened since the Olympics.  I mean, there’s obviously a big letdown coming straight from there and having to go play.  He was supposed to play Raonic and he pulled out with the knee.  I saw the first match he played in Cincy and I thought he looked good.  He looked like he was moving well and then he lost the next round.  That surprised me.

 

Having said that, he’s much tougher to beat in a longer match, if he’s healthy.  So I still would suspect that if he’s playing as well as ‑‑ because the way he played at the Olympics, I don’t see him not making a serious run and not winning the whole thing.

 

PATRICK McENROE:  I agree, I think he’s probably the most vulnerable of the top three, but that’s not saying a lot because the other guys are pretty much not vulnerable at all, Djokovic and Federer.  Murray still does have those matches where his energy is sort of low and he can be very defensive.  I don’t think he has them as often as he did.  Certainly Lendl has helped him a lot there.  I think he’s a little more vulnerable to a solid guy who is ranked between 15 and 30 upsetting him than Federer and Djokovic are.

Q.  How important is the Olympic title compared to Grand Slam title?  And how are Nadal’s injury problems?

JOHN McENROE:  Those are both good questions.  With Nadal, we are all worried, and we are all hopeful he will make the type of comeback that he made when he injured his knee like three years ago.  When you are talking about one of the greatest to ever play the game, you don’t want to see him have to go out with physical problems before he wants to.  So that goes without saying that everyone is concerned, including myself, that we want to see him back in the mix as soon as possible, because he’s huge for our sport.  And the first part of the question was, what was it again?  I’m sorry.

 

Q.  How important is the Olympic title compared to a Grand Slam title?

JOHN McENROE:  The Olympics started to get some recognition, this is just my opinion, when Agassi won in ’96, he had not really done a whole lot that year for his standards.  He showed that it meant a lot to him, and I think that raised some eyebrows with players that up to that time, and following it even, a lot of the top players, maybe half the top players, if not more, didn’t play.

 

So each Olympics that’s gone by, I think you’ve seen more top players play, perhaps at the expense of Davis Cup, for example.  They picked and choose, and realize it’s only one week or ten days and now it’s one week and they have cut it to two‑out‑of‑three, and there’s something beautiful about the Olympics.

 

I think in the future, there to be a decision made, in my opinion, they should elevate it; if we are going to play it, we should elevate it to something that’s as big as the Grand Slams, which I don’t think it is.   I mean, I know points‑wise, it’s considered to be behind 14 other tournaments, the four Majors and the ten Masters Series.  I find that ludicrous.  But I don’t think that at this point, even though it was nice for Murray and it was a boost at Wimbledon that it’s at the level of the four slams.

 

And it would have to be determined by the powers that be or the players, whether it’s 2016 or 2020, that this will count as a fifth Grand Slam, as an example.  So that in the history books, when you count how many Grand Slams people have won, it would include the Olympics.  Well, maybe you can’t do that.  But to me, that’s the only way it would truly be at the same level as the other slams.

Q.  John, are you looking forward to the exhibition game with Adam Sandler, and how much practice is involved with you and Adam with that?  Will you and Adam be practicing?

JOHN McENROE:  Hopefully.  He may need a little more practice than I do, I’m just guessing.  But yeah, I’m looking forward to it.  It’s going to be fun.  It’s Thursday night, Wednesday or Thursday, that’s right before men’s quarters and that’s a big time for our men as it winds down to the top couple players.

 

PATRICK McENROE:  Let me just say, John, since he won’t be able to be in the broadcast booth for that match, I’m hoping Will Ferrell will come up and join me.

 

JOHN McENROE:  Well, you know, you may know this, Pat, Will was originally involved but I guess he decided he would rather broadcast a match with you.  They have got Kevin James, who obviously he’s got a sense of humor, too, and Adam.  So I think it’s going to be a lot of fun.  If I don’t break too much of a sweat, I’ll try to get up there for that match with you.

Q.  Have you ever played with him before?  Are you friends?

JOHN McENROE:  I would like to consider myself a friend.  He’s been nice enough to put me in for his movies, not regularly by any means.  I would like to consider myself as a friend to some degree.  Think he’s a great guy.  But I have not been on a tennis court with him, never.

Q.  That is exciting and we are looking forward to that.

JOHN McENROE:  I’ll be nervous but I’ll be less nervous than him in this case, because there will probably be 10,000 or 15,000, and I’m a little more used to it on a tennis court than he is.  Hopefully I won’t be the one to lay an egg but I’m confident that we’re going to get it done.

 

THE MODERATOR:  For folks who are not familiar with what they are talking about, the second Thursday of the tournament, 7:00 on ESPN2, Adam Sandler and John will team against Kevin James and Jim Courier in an exhibition doubles match for charity, and comedian Colin Quinn will be the chair umpire and will no doubt have his hands full.

Q.  A lot of players are doing better these days it seems, after the age of 30.  How does a pro train, eat and compete differently when you get to that point of your career and draw back on your own histories, if you could.

JOHN McENROE:  Well, I’ll start.  I wasn’t one of those guys that got better with age, so I do sort of look at what’s happening today and sort of feel like, wow, it would be good to be sort of around a time where you have more knowledge about the training, the best training to do on and off the court, what to eat, how to recover, etc.

 

And so you see basically players with teams around him now.  And so that every little detail is executed to the highest possible degree; and it sort of would be nice to feel like at a later age ‑‑ I think that in a nutshell, is because of the knowledge and the ability to sort of make decisions pretty quickly that will help the player, a, improve, or b, recover, is why you saw more 30‑year‑olds and older than ever playing at Wimbledon this year.

I think that’s good because you are able to appreciate even more what you’ve accomplished and better able to handle what goes along with it.  So I’m actually happy to see that this is becoming more of a trend than ever.

 

PATRICK McENROE:  I would just add to that that I think it’s not only the top, top players; that obviously can afford to have a coach and trainer and hitting partner, but it’s players that are not even necessarily at the top, top of the game.  Tommy Haas obviously was a Top‑5 player, but even guys below him, you know, are still playing into their early 30s that don’t have a full‑time.

 

I think that’s just realizing the off‑court training is more important as you get older, taking care of your body, doing the off‑court fitness, stretching.  So get to the point where the tennis side of it isn’t as important as the hours that you spend on the court.  But I think a lot of these players spend as much time, if not more, sort of preparing to play, preparing to practice, and doing off‑court work to keep their bodies as fit as possible.  I think it’s great for tennis but it’s not great for the young guys trying to break in.  It used to be that 17, 18, 19 years old, you were breaking through and winning Majors.  Now, you can barely get a teenager in the top hundred in the men’s game.

Q.  Specifically to Roger, what has he done both on the court and from what you may know off the court, his training, to maintain this level?

JOHN McENROE:  I don’t know the specifics of that, but I do know that Roger was someone who trained a lot harder than people realise.  He had a place in the Far East, the Middle East, excuse me, in Dubai, and trained in extreme conditions, hot conditions.  And I’m going under the assumption to some degree, but I don’t know this for sure, exactly what Patrick said is what he’s doing.  He’s maximizing sort of his off‑court training to subsidize what he does on the court, because his body ‑‑ he would be a perfect example to test out, because he’s 31 and he’s now participating, I believe, in his 52nd consecutive major.  So if there’s ever a guy to look at and see what he’s doing, that should be studied for sure.

 

PATRICK McENROE:  Obviously what makes Federer so great, obviously his ability, his talent, but his work ethic and his ability to brush off both the wins and the losses.  That’s what’s been to me the most amazing thing that he’s had these sort of crushing losses in big matches, whether it was Djokovic last year in the Open where he could easily look back and say, man, a couple of swings here or there, and I would have 21 majors.

 

But he somehow managed to just let it happen, no big deal, I’m moving on, I’ll playing well; he never dwells on either the negative or the positive.  I think he certainly uses the positive when he gets on a roll and gets the confidence going.              That’s why I think coming into this year’s Open, he’s going to be very, very tough to beat, because I feel like he’s playing with more confidence than he’s had in a couple of years.  Obviously when he didn’t have the utmost of confidence, you could still play him as the No. 2 or No. 3 player in the world.

Share

“On the Call” with Roger Federer for the Emirates Airline US Open Series

Roger Federer held a conference call with the media on Monday afternoon to discuss his participation in the 2012 Emirates Airline US Open Series, which this week in Mason, Ohio for the Western and Southern Open.

Q. Novak Djokovic won the Australian Open and Rafa Nadal the French Open, you Wimbledon, Andy Murray the gold medal. Would you consider this year’s US Open to be sort of a tiebreaker to the tournament of who has had the best year?
ROGER FEDERER: Obviously it gives you a direction, yes. But you have the ATP World Tour Finals at the end of the year and there’s still a lot of tournaments to play for like Shanghai and Paris, so forth. It’s not just only I think the US Open, otherwise the winner wouldn’t play the remainder of the year. I think that’s not going to happen. It is interesting, obviously, that three different guys have won three different majors this year, plus Andy the gold. It definitely sets a great tone for the US Open, there’s no doubt about that.

Q. I’m wondering if you have had the time or taken the time to analyze what happened at the gold medal match. It was so lopsided, so out of the character, not what we’re used to seeing.
ROGER FEDERER: Honestly it took me five minutes to analyze really. I didn’t need to kind of sit down and go in a dark room and cry over it and kind of understand what happened. I think I understood rather quickly what happened. I thought Andy played a good match. The beginning of the match was very close. I had some chances there. Had some chances in the second set. I think I missed nine breakpoints, I didn’t make one. That obviously doesn’t work in a big match like this against a great player like Andy. Once he was in the lead, obviously he did really well to keep the lead. Yeah, I think that was it for me. Maybe I was emotionally drained a touch. Maybe I was a bit tired from the Del Potro match. I thought Andy did really well to put the pressure on me. It was out of character for me to lose nine games a row in the finals. That’s obviously something that can happen, but I guess I got myself to blame, and Andy’s great level of play. For me, I moved on really quickly. I was happy for him and disappointed for me. I was still very happy to get the silver and the medal for Switzerland.

Q. Could you look back to Wimbledon a little bit? Everybody always tries to retire players when they hit 30. It seems like the game is skewing a little older now.
ROGER FEDERER: I think you’re right. I mean, I think over 30 players in the main draw of the French Open. Seeing, for instance, how well Tommy Haas is playing, how many of my generation are still playing and playing well, it’s nice to see really. I remember when I was coming up on tour how many great rivalries we had in the younger generation. When I came up, we came up, basically there was still Agassi, Sampras, Moya, Henman, you name it, all the older guys that made the tour work. I think we had so many great young players coming up, it’s nice to see so many guys are playing well, holding on and winning titles really. I think it’s really good times in tennis. Like you say, you have the older generation, you have the generation of Rafa that’s extremely strong as well, and now the new generation is coming through as well with Bernard Tomic, Milos Raonic, David Goffin, Kei Nishikori, all those guys. It’s good times in tennis right now. But I do hope we get even some more better younger juniors coming through in the next couple years.

Q. With a longer-than-normal grass court season in 2012, such a short turnaround to prepare for New York, do you think it’s tougher to make the switch from grass courts to hard courts this season? What are the precautionary measures you might implement to ensure you can stay healthy now?
ROGER FEDERER: Well, there’s no doubt about it, this is not an ideal preparation. I mean, it’s amazing, for instance, what Novak was able to do. It’s not impossible, but it’s just very hard on the body and mind to travel halfway around the world, go on a different surface, win, then back it up week and week again. Obviously, the US Open is only coming up. That hasn’t even started yet. It’s been tough. In the past you would take maybe a few weeks off for a top player, then prepare for three brutal weeks on hard courts, then come over here wanting to fire out of all cylinders. This year it’s different. Obviously we stayed on grass. Now all I have is four days on hard courts before I play my first round here probably against a top 30 player or top 40 player. It makes it obviously very difficult and a big focus for me to get through my first-round match over here. Obviously physically I feel fine. The body did hurt maybe the first couple of days just because the movement is a bit different. But I think everybody has a bit of issues like that in the beginning. So it’s just important to be professional, sleep enough, eat healthy, do all your treatment the right way, all that stuff, so you will manage the next like over six months on hard courts now. That’s the most brutal surface out there. It’s a big stretch coming up for all of us really.

Q. You just said that physically you feel fine. How do you feel mentally and emotionally going into this year’s US Open as opposed to last year? Can you look back a little bit on last year’s Open.
ROGER FEDERER: I’m very excited, very happy. Back to world No. 1. I’ve had a magical summer for me. Really ever since the French Open, it’s been a good year all around anyways, but winning Wimbledon, getting back to world No. 1, there’s been so many things happening for me, it’s been a wonderful last few weeks. I feel like I’m feeling better than last year because I was a bit shaken up against the loss by Jo-Wilfred Tsonga, and even through Montréal, it was a tough situation. Cincy I didn’t play all that great, lost to Tomas Berdych. I came into the US Open not quite sure of how I was playing. I was actually playing really, really well. I had that brutal match with Novak, up two sets to love. I feel like this year mentally I’m more at peace. Then again, that doesn’t give you any – how do you say – idea yet of how you’re going to do at the US Open and Cincinnati. We all have to wait and see how that goes.

Q. You mentioned about reclaiming the world No. 1 spot in the ATP world rankings. You surpassed Pete Sampras’ record by doing that this summer. At your age, at this time in your career, how important is it to you to keep surpassing records like those of Pete’s?
ROGER FEDERER: I don’t know how important it really is for me. I just think it’s a motivation, a big one, for me to be able to have the opportunity to reach such great records, you know, equal, tie and break records like these. It obviously kind of gets you going. It motivates me to play against younger generations. It motivates me playing in front of full stadiums. All these things add to the great puzzle and life I’m living as a player. It makes easier, all the sacrifices, all the traveling, playing we do on a daily basis. But it’s not most important. But obviously it’s a nice thing to have and one I hope I will be very proud of once I retire.

Q. The US Open has record prize money again this year, $25.5 million. You’re somebody that travels all around the world. Can you tell us if you’ve seen how the economy has affected different places? I imagine pro tennis players are insulated because the tournaments take very good care of you as you travel. But can you talk about if you’ve seen any change in how places have been affected by the economy over the last few years.
ROGER FEDERER: By ‘places’ you mean tournaments, right?

Q. Yes.
ROGER FEDERER: I think we’ve gone through the crisis – who knows, maybe there’s another crisis on the horizon here – actually pretty good, considering how bad the economy was from 2008 till now. We’re obviously trying to sign on some sponsors during that time for the tour because we lost Mercedes and others. I think we’ve actually gotten through this financial crisis, economic crisis, really well. I think also, obviously because it’s a one-week or two-week event, you have an entire year to look for ways trying to make your tournament sustainable. Obviously you hope that they had long-term contracts. Obviously some did get unlucky, that the contracts ran out right at the time that you didn’t want it to run out. Obviously then it was a dangerous and difficult situation really for those. They asked the ATP for relief, the council and board. That’s what we discussed and tried to make it a good decision for the tournament but also for the players, because you want to keep the jobs alive for all those players, that they can travel the world and still make money and have all those possibilities to play tournaments. Overall we’ve gotten through this pretty good. Yeah, we hope it’s a successful tour, and I feel it is.

Q. Could you address the fact that a couple weeks ago they announced that Wimbledon in 2015 will move into the summer an extra week, so there would be three weeks of grass court play prior to it.
ROGER FEDERER: Well, I think it’s a great thing. I think it was very well-received from the players. From what I heard, everybody was in favor of it. Think back at how the tour used to be. We used to have three Grand Slams on grass, and now we only have one. We barely have one month of tennis on grass. Obviously it’s nice to keep that surface alive a bit more. It gives just a bit of a bigger rest between the French Open and Wimbledon, so that completely makes sense. Obviously, you have to understand every change brings problems from time to time. But I’m happy that Wimbledon and the US Open were able to sort out that kind of a situation because it wasn’t an easy one for the US Open, but a very good one for the players. I think Wimbledon is excited about it, too. I think it has many more upsides than downsides to it.

Q. For those of us who weren’t at Wimbledon for the Olympics, how different was it? Was there anything you missed that you would normally have at Wimbledon? Anything you liked about the Olympics?
ROGER FEDERER: Yes, many things I missed from the Wimbledon tournament. I guess you also felt that it was just a completely different event. Those things we thought we were very nice, then other things we had to get used to. I think it was nice we had to adjust, that it was a completely different feel from Wimbledon to the Olympics. I think overall it was a well-run tournament. At times it almost felt like the site was too big for the Olympics. I can only speak from experience from Sydney, Athens and Beijing. They all created the stadiums for the Olympics. They were not as big, obviously, as Wimbledon. Hardly any is, except for the US Open. I thought it was great to have such a big site, but at times it was too spread out, I thought it was. Then again, it didn’t change the fact that we had great atmospheres in the stadiums, that it was a very unique place to play tennis at where there is so much history.

Q. When your girls were born, you spoke about wanting to be around the game long enough for them to be aware of who you were as a tennis player and what you had accomplished. What do you think their sense is now, because they are a little bit older, and what do you and Mirka tell them?
ROGER FEDERER: It was really Mirka’s wish more than mine. I’m just happy I’m still playing and things are still going so well for me, that I’m actually able to feed them almost on a daily basis. That’s what I was worried most with Mirka. Maybe with having twins, it was going to get extremely difficult to travel the world with them, see them enough, that it was not going to actually pull me away from the game. That was my biggest worry. It was really Mirka’s dream to have them still see me play from time to time. We’ve already had that now. So I don’t know exactly what they think of me. As their dad, they know I’m a tennis player, that I do play a lot of tennis, but I don’t think they understand that it’s actually a job. They don’t understand, I think, the difference between a match and practice. It doesn’t matter. They sit in stadiums. They’ve created obviously some of the most unique moments in my life, having seen them, you know, at let’s say trophy ceremony in Basel, trophy ceremony particularly at Wimbledon this year. Those are memories no one can ever take away from me and Mirka. That was a very intimate moment for me and Mirka even though it was in the eye of the storm with everybody watching. It was a great, great feeling for me. I hope they also look back and were happy we did those things. We really try to protect them as much as we can. Life on tour is good with them. I’m happy the way things are going.

Q. Do you want them to play the game?
ROGER FEDERER: Not necessarily, no. If they really, really want to, I’ll support them. If they don’t, I’m very happy they do something different, as well.

Q. There’s been a lot of talk over your records. There’s two that don’t get a lot of attention. You’ve never retired from a match once you started plus you’ve played every Grand Slam since 2000. What pride do you take from those?
ROGER FEDERER: I wonder how many close calls I’ve actually had to retire during a match. Maybe a handful where I was just thinking, man, I’m in too much pain, I maybe actually shouldn’t be playing. But I can just play, or I have so much pain, but I know I won’t injure myself more. It was more kind of like some of those moments. Obviously playing the consecutive Grand Slams, you don’t really think about it. I’ve never actually entered a Grand Slam just to enter to keep that streak going. I guess I was always lucky enough and prepared enough to feel like I could do something and play well or even at times obviously win very often at Grand Slams. So that’s not one thing I thought about. But every match I play, not retiring after a match for me, that’s something that’s almost normal. If you do enter, you’re supposed to be playing. I’m happy also I’ve played schedules from always January till November basically. I’ve never taken a full season off after the Open. I’ve never taken more than, what, eight weeks off from the tour. I’m obviously proud of this. Then again, it doesn’t mean that much. I know other players have many more problems trying to do that all the time and some just can’t because it’s not possible with their body or they’ve gotten unlucky much more than I have over the years. I think I’ve taken great care of myself and mentally I’m very strong to be able to handle all of that, I do believe.

Transcript courtesy of ASAPSports

Tennis Panorama News participates in many tennis media conference calls. “On The Call” serves to give readers an inside view of tennis news.

Share

“On the Call” with Mardy Fish on the Emirates Airline US Open Series

Mardy Fish Photo by Tennis Panorama News

Mardy Fish held a conference call with the media on Thursday afternoon to discuss his participation in the 2012 Emirates Airline US Open Series, which begins this week with the women’s Bank of the West Classic in Stanford, Calif.  Fish plays in the first men’s event at the BB&T Atlanta Open, July 14-22. Transcript courtesy of ASAPSports.
ERIC SCHUSTER:  Thank you, everyone, for joining us for the second in a series of player conference calls we will be hosting throughout the Emirates Airline US Open Series.  On the phone today we have the 2011 Series champion Mardy Fish.  After a recent health scare that kept him off the court for most of the spring, Mardy returned to action at Wimbledon, where he reached the round of 16.
He is scheduled to begin his title defense at the BB& T Atlanta next week followed by the Citi Open in Washington, D.C., the Rogers Cup in Toronto, and the Western & Southern Open in Cincinnati.
Before we get into the Q&A, I’ll ask Mardy if he can share some of his thoughts on winning last year’s Emirates Airline US Open Series title and his plans and goals for the summer of 2012.
MARDY FISH:  Thank you.  Thanks, everyone, for being on the call.  This is my favorite time of the year, so obviously this is an exciting time.  I played so well last year.  Winning the US Open Series was an honor, and I played well in every event that I played in the summer, including the US Open obviously.  You know, it should be fun again.  Obviously I’m really looking forward to it.  I’m going to start in Atlanta and head there this weekend and get going.

Q.  How did getting back on the court and playing several matches in succession at Wimbledon help you sort of get your feel back after having some time off there obviously for the health reasons?
MARDY FISH:  Yeah, it was huge to be able to get through the first two matches.  Obviously the first couple are going to be the hardest ones.  You’re not going to come back as sharp.
You know, my fitness level isn’t where I want it to be for obvious reasons, but it was nice to be able to play those matches, to be in pressure situations, high pressure situations in a Grand Slam to where I can sort of get those out of the way and move on.
A lot of times when you take some time off, you have to usually‑‑ sometimes you have to take your lumps in tournaments, and you’re going to play some bad matches and probably not get through them, and I was lucky enough to get through those first two rounds to where I could really feel like I had some matches under my belt and I could start playing some good tennis again.
I did that in the third round.  I played very well against a good young player in Goffin, and I certainly played well enough to win against Tsonga.  I played great the first day, first rain delay, the third rain delay and the fourth rain delay.  I played fine.  I actually won more points than he did in the match, in the four‑set match, which doesn’t happen too often.  I was happy with the way I played there.
And obviously going into Atlanta and D.C., those are tournaments that I’ve had success at, and I’ll try to build on some of the matches that I won at Wimbledon.

Q.  I just want to ask you a quick question about the Olympics.  It seems like a lot of the players are more excited and more enthusiastic about playing the Olympics than in previous years, and I just wanted to get your thoughts on why that may be, just taking into account your past experience playing at the Olympics and how the Olympics factors into the players now compared to what it did when you started playing them?
MARDY FISH:  I think the Olympics this time around as opposed to maybe 2008 is a little more appealing considering that we’re playing at Wimbledon.  You’re playing at a familiar place, as well, and a pretty localized place, too.  There’s not many easy ways to get to Beijing.  London ‑‑ it’s a pretty Euro dominated sport, so naturally it’s pretty easy to get to London for those guys.  And then obviously playing at Wimbledon will be special and will be interesting, as well, to see people not in white clothes and things like that.
And it’ll also be interesting how they turn the grass around so quickly and see how they’re going to do that because we beat it up pretty good throughout the two weeks.
I think all those things together, a lot of people are looking forward to it.

Q.  As a two‑time champion in the Atlanta tournament, somebody could say that this tournament is Mardy Town, but will the third time be the charm, considering you’re going to have some stiff competition?  Will there be any Fish Heads present at this match, and will you be able to pull it off a third time?
MARDY FISH:  I would love to.  I’m not sure about the fans.  You know, we get great support in Atlanta.  Atlanta is actually one of the more fun weeks that we go to, fun cities that we go to all year.  They’re extremely knowledgeable in the game of tennis.  I think there’s more USTA members per capita in Atlanta than there is in the entire country, or at least that’s what I heard.  It’s very natural and very easy for us to play there in front of fans like that.
I certainly enjoy playing there.  Obviously I love the weather, the heat.  Playing in that type of heat is not just about being fit; as well it’s about convincing yourself that you like it more than the other guy, pushing your body further than you think it’ll go.  You know, there’s numerous ways to get through it, and I love it.  I grew up in it.  I grew up in that weather, and I play my best tennis in that type of heat.
So I hope to‑‑ yes, like you said, there’s going fob a lot of great players there, as there has been the past two years, as well.  Look, I’ve had two very, very close matches in the finals, both to Isner and to‑‑ I’m sure he’ll be looking to win one of those titles, as well.

Q.  There’s been talk lately that Wimbledon may move their tournament up a week, which would then crowd out one of the US Open Series tournaments.  Any thoughts about that, the impact on that then on the US Open and so on?
MARDY FISH:  I haven’t heard anything about that.  I mean, I think that would give‑‑ speaking of not just Americans but some of the other European players and some of the players coming from afar, it gives them an extra week to maybe come over and get used to the weather and get used to everything.  You know, it’s already a tough turnaround between the French Open and Wimbledon.  Three weeks is not very long.  Two weeks would be even tougher.  So I’m not sure that something like that would ever happen.

Q.  If I can, following on the toughness of that schedule, will your cardiac incident impact your mind and how you determine your schedule for next year?
MARDY FISH:  It very well could.  You know, I know that everything is fine with me, but I’m going to put myself in positions where I’m very comfortable from now on, that’s for sure.  I’ve played a lot of years out here, and I’ve played every tournament there is.  In the years that I have remaining, I’ll try to put myself in the most comfortable situations for me so something like that doesn’t happen again.  It might be a little bit different for me than other players.
So yes, there is a possibility, but that’s a little bit in advance from now.

Q.  And finally, did the schedule have anything at all to do with the incident?
MARDY FISH:  As far as not playing the Olympics?

Q.  No, no, the schedule you played before the incident occurred, did it have any impact at all from your cardiologist on that?
MARDY FISH:  Well, I think stress is one of the main reasons why you get arrhythmias, stress, alcohol, caffeine, things like that, that bring them on.  I went to Australia in January, I went to Switzerland and back, to LA for Davis Cup, then I went to Marseilles and Dubai, then back to LA.  So I think we can draw our own conclusions how hard the schedule is for us and how tough it is on our bodies and our minds.

Q.  As the two‑time defending champion of our tournament, you’ve obviously had a lot of success in Atlanta the past two years, but we have moved our location this year from kind of the suburbs to a more central location inside the city.  How do you think the change in atmosphere is going to affect the players?  Is it going to be more beneficial for them to be in a more vibrant, exciting atmosphere?
MARDY FISH:  Yeah, they keep switching on us every year.  First was the Atlanta Athletic Club, which we loved.  We loved both locations.  They were great.  They got great crowds.  I expect the same in that regard.
I don’t know what to expect as far as it being in downtown.  I’ve seen pictures of the facilities now, but obviously I haven’t been there.  You know, who knows as far as the weather is concerned as to how the buildings might trap in the heat and stuff like that.
But we’re looking forward to it, and hopefully one of these years we can stick on one specific venue that we can all stay at every time and everyone can look forward to, because it is kind of hard from time to time to keep moving around from place to place.  But I know everyone has enjoyed both venues that we’ve had so far, and I’m sure this one will be no different.

Q.  When players come back from an injury or a health incident that keep them off court for a long time, they obviously have to get themselves physically prepared for the tour, but talk about preparing yourself mentally to go back on tour and talk about your level of confidence going into the hard court season.
MARDY FISH:  Yeah, that’s been the hardest part for me is mentally trusting everything.  You know, the summer is tough in general just because you know you have to deal with the player and the opponent across the net, but you also have to deal with the weather and sort of the conditions that you have to play in, and you prepare yourself the best way you can.  I’ve prepared myself very well the past couple years, and this year is a little bit different going in.
But I’m doing everything I can, getting myself into the best shape I can, took a few days off after Wimbledon and then started to get back at it and grind again.
It’s tough being in LA because the weather is 70 degrees and sunny out here, and it’s 100 degrees everywhere else.  So it’s kind of hard to train in that type of stuff.  But I’ll get to Atlanta as early as I can and try to get into that climate and that weather and try to deal with it as best I can.

Q.  After that tournament in Atlanta you’ll be back up in D.C. this year, the Citi Open.  Last year you had to pull out.  Talk about coming back to this tournament where you’ve had some success and also regarding the weather here because obviously it’s pretty grueling and can be very, very oppressive.
MARDY FISH:  No, it’s one of my favorite stops of the year.  I love the city of Washington, D.C.  The venue is outstanding.  The weather is hot, but it’s the kind of weather that I enjoy playing in.  And having Citi come on board and having a new title sponsor is great for the tournament and great for the city of Washington, D.C., as well.  It’s nice to be a part of that event because obviously I wanted to play last year but just‑‑ it just didn’t work in my schedule.  It was a good thing for me because I had won a ton of matches in the weeks prior.  I played well at Wimbledon, as well, before that, and then obviously played Davis Cup.
So I had a lot of matches under me and needed just a small break there to kind of regroup and regenerate and go up to Montreal, where I did well there, too.  The schedule worked out well for me last year, but the only miss or blip on it was that I had to miss D.C.  We won’t have that problem this year, and I’ve worked my schedule around to be able to be a part of that event, so I look forward to it.

Q.  And on the scheduling front, obviously not playing the Olympics sort of gives you a jump start on the hard court season.  How do you think that might help you with the US Open Series again this year?
MARDY FISH:  Well, I see it as a plus as far as playing the events that I do well at.  Playing in the States is my most fun time of the year, playing in the summer, playing in the heat, and I didn’t want to miss that.  I didn’t want to miss two full weeks of the most important time for me or the most fun time for me.  I’ve played the Olympics before, and I think it’s very hard to play the Olympics and Davis Cup in the same year.  Everyone’s schedule is suppressed during an Olympic year.
I was lucky enough to do well in the Olympics when I played in 2004 and win the silver medal, so I’ve got a medal and I’ve got the memories from that, so I’ll skip the Olympics this year and look forward to going to D.C., where I would have missed it had I gone to the Olympics.

Q.  We’re looking forward to having you up in New York obviously for the Open.  The crowd up here in New York and the energy is very unique.  What do you enjoy most about playing in the Open?
MARDY FISH:  I enjoy the‑‑ sort of the camaraderie that you can get from the fans for the American players‑‑ it’s definitely the most favorite Slam for the Americans as far as being able to play in those big courts and having the crowd behind you.  We go so many places, in Spain and in Italy and in England, where you can play a guy from that country, and those fans are just going crazy for their player.  But we know for a fact that we have that one big event where everyone wants to do well, and we’re going to have the fans behind us and rooting as loud as they can for us.  So that makes it so much fun and exciting and one of the best times of the whole year for us.

Q.  Winning matches in Grand Slams, especially when the crowd is behind you, as you said, is great, but it’s obviously different when you’re playing and representing your country, whether it be Davis Cup or Olympics.  How can you compare the two?
MARDY FISH:  Well, Davis Cup is a little bit different animal in the sense that, yes, you feel like you’re playing for your country and you also feel like you’re playing for your teammates.  The Olympics is a little bit different because it’s still a regular tournament, and we still have ‑‑ every week that we play, we still have the USA next to our name, and the Olympics is sort of the same.  It’s a regular event, where Davis Cup is such a unique animal where you’re relying on other‑‑ you’re relying on your teammates to win.  You can’t win on your own.  It’s the only team thing, team sort of sport or team thing that we have in tennis, and so that’s why I love Davis Cup so much, because you can’t necessarily just rely on yourself.  You can play well and you can win matches, but you need your teammates to play well and win, as well.  That’s when it feels so satisfying.

Q.  You and Andy have to answer a lot of questions about where the next American stars are coming from.  The USTA will be introducing major changes to the junior competitive structure going forward.  It’s kind of devolved since you were a junior where players can kind of chase points, and a lot of these players ranked 300, 400, 500 were getting into national events, but now it’s going to return to where you have to earn your way to nationals through sectional play, like when you and Courier and Andy were juniors in Florida.  Do you have any stories from your junior days about working your way up in Florida tournaments, and what do you think about these changes?
MARDY FISH:  Absolutely I do, yeah.  I remember playing the regular events in Florida, playing the designated‑‑to try to get into the designateds, to try to get into sort of the national events from there.  And it’s sort of the same setup in the pros that it is in the juniors, it’s just you start‑‑ you’ve got to start in the little cities like where I grew up in Vero Beach, and I remember playing tournaments in Vero and in Fort Pierce and West Palm Beach to make it to the designateds in Lakeland or Tampa, to make it to the national events or just even smaller national events all the way up into Kalamazoo and things like that.
Yeah, I certainly remember playing and going through all that, and felt like the more tournaments that I played, the more tournaments I was able to go to and to compete in was going to help my growth as a tennis player at such a young age.  So I think that’s a very good idea to go back to that, instead of just being able to get in sort of on name recognition.

Q.  And the feedback from college coaches, they’re saying they want tougher U.S. juniors coming out to compete with the international players that they’re recruiting.  Do you think that will maybe produce more U.S. stars and tougher juniors, tougher college players?
MARDY FISH:  Sure, yeah.  You’re just going to get more people, more kids playing more tournaments, and I think that’s the best thing‑‑ that’s the best way to look at it.  Once you play and realize how much fun playing tennis is, how competitive it is, how much fun it is to play an individual sport like that, you’re going to get more and more kids sticking with the game.  I think that’s the goal for them.

Q.  I just wanted to know, how have you had to adapt your training and your nutrition, if needed, with the illness that you had and now coming back?
MARDY FISH:  The nutrition stays the same, has stayed the same for a while now.  As far as training is concerned, yeah, I mean, I’m getting back to being able to do everything that I was prior, it just took some time to really get back into shape, into match shape.  I still need matches.  I still need to get out in the heat, to get to Atlanta, to get to these places early and really get in the climate and prepare myself as good as I can.
You know, just playing these tournaments and playing in the States will help that a lot.

Q.  We’ve also heard a lot about the up‑and‑coming American players that are juniors.  Are there any players that you’ve kind of taken under your belt, considering that you’re a veteran with a lot of experience on the tour and have played as a pro for so many years?
MARDY FISH:  You know, someone like Ryan Harrison jumps out at you.  He’s sort of a sponge when it comes to information from all the guys that have played or have played for a while or have just retired.  You know, there’s still a lot of players.  The only problem with taking someone under your wing is that you’re trying to compete with them, as well, and it’s an individual sport, so it’s not a team sport.
I’m certainly open to discussing anyone’s game at any time.  If a young player would approach me, I would give him my full attention.  But they’re still trying to take your lunch away.

Q.  Exactly, survival of the fittest.
MARDY FISH:  So this is an individual sport, and that’s what makes it so great.
What I’m trying to say is that there isn’t that much sort of dialogue between players trying to help players out, and if someone like Ryan Harrison comes to you and asks you a question, you give him your full attention.  But there’s not a ton of it, because A, there’s not a ton of young Americans that are coming up that are playing as well as he is, and B, you’re trying to play for yourself, as well.

FastScripts Transcript by ASAP Sports

Tennis Panorama News participates in many tennis media conference calls. “On The Call” serves to give readers an inside view of tennis news.

Share

Wimbledon “On The Call” with ESPN Programming and Production

On Tuesday, June 19, a media conference call previewing the all-new, all-ESPN Wimbledon was held with Jason Bernstein, ESPN senior director, programming & acquisitions; Jed Drake, ESPN senior vice president & executive producer; and Jamie Reynolds, ESPN vice president, event production.  Wimbledon begins Monday, June 25, exclusive to ESPN platforms.  Each made an opening comment and then took questions.

 

JED DRAKE:  We are thrilled with the privilege and the responsibility to begin our now 12‑year relationship as the exclusive broadcaster in the U.S. of Wimbledon, and it is certainly something that we have worked hard towards achieving, and I humbly submit that the good efforts of Jamie and the tennis team over these few years had factored into the decision ultimately by the All England Club to allow us this opportunity to televise the entire tournament.

 

We will, as I said, televise everything live, and not only on ESPN but on ESPN2 the second week, and on ESPN3 and on ESPN 3D Wednesday through Sunday.  So by Wednesday, the second week, we’ll have in essence four networks televising simultaneously, and that’s the kind of coverage that this event deserves and that we will, as I said, shepherd with great care because we all understand how important this tournament is to our company, to Wimbledon and to our viewers.   So with that, we’ll go around the horn here.  Jamie?

 

JAMIE REYNOLDS:  Thanks, Jed.  We are indeed here at Wimbledon.  It’s been a short hop, finishing up the French Open and now bringing the majority of our folks here to SW19.  We have no less than about 225 people credentialed for the event at this point.  That does not include our technology and engineering partner in Vision, who’s the provider of that ‑‑ supplier of those services and operations here on‑site.  So it’s a pretty hefty run that we’ve got here of folks.

 

Through the fortnight, we will have first ball to last ball coverage.  We are running with the BBC on all production decisions, which has been a great boon for us and a terrific cooperation with them as our partners running through this, and with the support of the All England Club, there are a great many innovations and opportunities to continue to broaden the scope of what this event represents.

 

The talent pool is rich and deep, and we can get into that if anybody would like to discuss that roster, as well, and from a technology standpoint and what we’re doing between Centre Court, Court 1 and the myriad of situations that we have from an edit standpoint, from a shoot style standpoint, we have tremendous assets that we can get into in detail, as well. Jason?

 

JASON BERNSTEIN:  Thanks, Jamie.  Yeah, as the guys said, yeah, we are pleased to be a part of really redefining how the championships are consumed by American audiences.  This is an opportunity unlike very few others for us to do so.  The all‑live coverage, as Jed mentioned, really will ensure that all matches will be seen live on all devices, and for the first time ever, every ladies’ and gentlemen’s quarterfinal will be seen live in its entirety coast to coast, and that’s something that we really pride ourselves on in working with the club to ensure that that live coverage is delivered coast to coast.

 

And further, our tennis portfolio is as significant as it’s ever been, and it is our goal to ensure that the tennis narrative from Australia through the US Open is told appropriately by ESPN, and we’re pleased that the All England Club entrusted us with allowing us to continue that narrative from the Club.

 

Q.  This is for whoever wants it, I guess.  I don’t know who would be most appropriate to field this.  But how important was it for the All England Club in negotiating this deal that you guys were getting everything live considering all the tape delays that NBC had been doing for the past decade‑plus at least and not having live matches on in this growing era of social media and up‑to‑the‑second updates on everything?

JASON BERNSTEIN:  For sure.  During the negotiation, it was abundantly clear that being live and bringing fans live matches was of paramount importance to both the All England Club and ESPN.  No doubt about it.  And our ability to do so, lining up two networks, and to Jed’s point four networks, given ESPN3 and 3D, merely ensured that we were serving all fans on all devices, all live, all the time, given that that’s what fans have required for so many years and given the expansive nature of social media and the social currency that live sport delivers.

 

Q.  Do you think there was a degree of frustration in the previous NBC contract for the All England Club?

JASON BERNSTEIN:  Yeah, I can’t speak for the Club, but I can speak for what fans have voiced over the years, and in any sport and in any walk of life, when there isn’t that immediate live payoff, there have been a number of letters written, stories written by folks like you, and it was always our intent to work with the Club to ensure that fans had the opportunity to see live coverage coast to coast.

 

Q.  This is for whoever most wants to speak to the question.  There will be people who will complain that they used to be able to see at least some Wimbledon on over‑the‑air channels.  Do you think that being able to see it live trumps being on free TV?

JASON BERNSTEIN:  I’m happy to make a quick response, and Jamie and Jed I know have some thoughts on this, as well.  In short, the schedule that we crafted with the All England Club really was designed to give fans the best of both worlds.  We wanted to obviously serve the fans on a live basis, every match possible to be consumed, and then in sports windows, the traditional sports windows, if you will, of broadcast television and weekend afternoons when live play has mostly been exhausted, we’re serving fans in the middle weekend with a highlight show on middle weekend when there is no play, so we’re giving fans an opportunity to experience Wimbledon for the first time if they haven’t witnessed it for the first week on ABC, and then encore presentations of both the ladies’ and gentlemen’s Finals will be seen in the late afternoon sports windows on ABC on both the Saturday and the final Sunday.

 

Q.  So both the men’s and women’s Finals will be able to be watched by people who don’t have cable?

JASON BERNSTEIN:  Correct.

 

Q.  And how anachronistic is it to tell people they couldn’t watch live sports in this day and age?  It was getting harder and harder to explain, wasn’t it?

JED DRAKE:  There wasn’t anything left to explain.  We were televising what we were televising live.

 

Q.  But to us West Coasties who weren’t getting it live, it was really annoying.

JED DRAKE:  I’m sure it was, but it’s not our issue in the past.

 

Q.  For Jamie and Jed, with ESPN’s increased role out there this year, increased investment, as well, has that increased the level of production resources you guys can have out there, whether it be crew, number of production trucks, cameras, anything on that end?  How has that affected the sort of toys you guys have to play with out there this year?

JED DRAKE:  I’ll let Jamie speak to it, but he just threw me an email about a half an hour ago on the number of credentials, and it’s over 220, so that speaks to the sheer size of the operation.  I’ll let Jamie speak to the specifics.

 

JAMIE REYNOLDS:  It’s fair to say that we have in some categories doubled the work force, and in other categories just to get the volume of hours that we’re doing, we’ve almost tripled.  We’ve tripled the number.  And when you look at it, just the sheer magnitude of operating on a 10‑hour day for the first week in the broadcast windows, and then the second week when we’re simultaneously broadcasting on E1 and E2, to say nothing of ESPN 3D and prepping things for ABC, we’ve got a work force that’s running concurrently right about that second week.  So that now requires us to have two fully functional integrated control rooms.

 

We’ve increased the central tape record area.  We’ve now on‑lined two brand‑new sets to accommodate both networks independently and can also integrate and work between both networks based on our story and editorial narrative, which is a massive undertaking at the club.

 

We’ve brought some force into this thing at this point.  Our edit suites, we now have three that are running 24 hours a day.  We have a 3D control room on‑line, as well.  And then to just help amplify that, we’ve had to increase our talent load, as well, because we will be servicing a heck of a number of hours, and as we often say, the video hospital never closes.  We’re up and running all the time.

 

Q.  This is to everybody.  Guys, Wimbledon obviously is pretty much the crown jewel of tennis, and you guys have the opportunity now to do it with your style and put your moniker on it.  What are some of the things that we’ll be seeing that will give us the ESPN style and brand to tennis?

JED DRAKE:  Jamie, if you want to go, really what that comes down to is a signature heretofore, and what has led us through all the years now of our coverage of not just Wimbledon but of the other Slams.  There are certain touchstones that we always emphasize, but I think in general I’ll let Jamie speak to the specifics.  But in general, I think we just have a very intelligent broadcast that plays to a knowledgeable audience, that is incredibly intelligent in terms of ensuring that we do proper justice to documentation, that we don’t over exert ourselves into the presentation, that we give the event respect, context, and a level of intelligence ultimately that enlightens our viewers.  But that’s just sort of around the fringes.

 

JAMIE REYNOLDS:  I think you can quantify it in three categories.  The first is when you’re involved in an event of this magnitude, coverage is what the coverage is of the match.  As Jed said, we don’t get in the way of it.  But there are three ingredients that enhance and amplify that coverage:  The first is the voice, the branding, who are the identifiable figures, the personalities that we attach to it, so you have to start with a talent roster and look at the depth, magnitude and the résumés that our group brings to this event, and that’s the voice.  That’s our identity.

 

The second level is the strategy with which we produce it.  And when you look at the first week, we treat it very much like a golf tournament in that our goal is to get our viewers, our customers to the most important matches at the right time in a live environment rather than backing things up on tape.  We have the ability to weave, to whip around, to run between courts and get invested in multiple story lines and pay them off properly because we’ve got the value of 10 hours to run with. So we can give you that full experience at home of what it’s like to be around the grounds Round 1, Round 2, Round 3, until the middle weekend.

 

The second week we take the strategy of getting invested in the matches.  As you get farther down in the Round of 16 through the Quarters, Semifinals and Finals, that target approach is then amplified by the feature elements, the look, the feel, the grandeur of the event that we try to deliver the atmosphere of this event, giving it its just place, its just due, and give our audience the full experience of being here as if they were on Centre Court or at Court 1.  So when you put those three elements together, the voices, the strategy and the focus, either in a whip‑around approach and then getting into a targeted approach, that defines the character of what we do.

 

Q.  Jed, what does the addition of the exclusivity for Wimbledon mean in terms of the overall portfolio of ESPN?  How does this sort of change the game for the network?

JED DRAKE:  Well, that may be somewhat of a question for Jason because it’s more of a programming angle on this.  But look, we’ve had a strategy for some time that says that we’re going to put together a portfolio of events that are at the highest level and really recognize their value, and when you look at tennis, it certainly is the case with Wimbledon and other championships, and we realize that it’s an important thing for our viewers, for our affiliates, that we have a portfolio with events at the highest possible level, and it speaks well to our brand.

 

I think over time, people have come to expect that from us, that they are going to see the most important events here.  Certainly you can’t have everything.  The test of time has shown in our industry that there’s not going to be one entity that’s going to have everything.  But we certainly feel very strong and proud of what we have overall, and Wimbledon clearly is one of those at the very top of the list.

 

My gosh, I mean, for another network to have had this for 42 years and for us to take this on now for the next 12 at the very least is ‑‑ what can I say, it’s a really cool thing for this company and for us, and like I said, we are really excited about the opportunity.

 

JASON BERNSTEIN:  I’d just amplify that, that our strategy is to deliver championship‑caliber content, and to crown champions on ESPN no doubt delivers value to our fans, our advertisers, our distributors and our other partners.  Our ESPN tennis portfolio now is as strong as any service in the world, and we’re thrilled to be associated with the major brands and certainly the preeminent tennis event in the world, and part of the service of delivering every major tennis event in the world on an ESPN service, and that’s an honor for us, as is it being an honor to be able to distribute the Breakfast At Wimbledon program and showcase all that that moniker carries over the years and taking it in a new direction with the All England Club and being a part of the All England Club’s history with bringing the Wimbledon trophies to the U.S. for the first time ever this past weekend. It demonstrates the evolutionary nature of the All England Club’s perspective and where we’re going as a company with the sport.

 

Q.  I know you have your multi screens on ESPN3, and I assume you’re doing the same thing on DirecTV with the multiple screens available.  I’m wondering how you guys feel, is that maybe something in the future that may look to be expanded?  Is that the way that maybe big events and golf and tennis best get presented is giving the viewer a choice of what they want to watch?

JASON BERNSTEIN:  Yeah, from a programming perspective, absolutely.  There may be times, as rare as they may be, that fans disagree with what the programming people put on the linear channel, so given that, we do believe when there’s so much content and so many matches and rounds of golf and players associated with these major marquee events, that we believe very much that fans should be able to access all the live content that’s made available, and that’s where Jamie and Jed, you guys can certainly elaborate as to how we do that and why that’s so important.

 

JAMIE REYNOLDS:  Well, I think when you look at what we strive for in differentiating between the multiple streams, the multiple distribution, it goes back to the identity and how we produce, package, wrap, if you will, the experience between the multiple screens.  At the end of the day, you want to be able to know that your customers, our audience, again, can have a different experience on any of those platforms, but at the end of the day, they’re still recognizing the content and the integrity of what we do for the event and the branding exercise.  In many ways it goes to the same philosophy coincidentally that you’ll see between ESPN1 and ESPN2 on Monday, Tuesday and Wednesday the second week and how we in many ways will focus E1, ESPN1, on Centre Court, while ESPN2 will be Court 1 specific, and what we’re calling the Grounds Pass Access to all the outer court matches.

 

So depending on your appetite of the day or your affinity for any of the players, you’ll know which network you want to invest in, if not bouncing back and forth between the experience.  We’ll keep audiences on both sides of the house on the linear network in the know, if you will, or up to date of what happens in that live‑live moment, and if you want to invest in one match or the other, you have the latitude or ability to do that.  And that experience then translates to what we do do through the rest of our digital platforms.

 

JASON BERNSTEIN:  And I’d just add that sometimes life can get in the way of a good six‑hour final, and being able to take your ESPN with you to experience both life and the match is a good thing, and that’s one of the things that we know that we can do and that we’re pleased to be able to do here with the championships.

 

JED DRAKE:  I think the thing that does get lost occasionally at particularly many of these majors is that the television courts that are accessible aren’t necessarily ‑‑ don’t always ‑‑ the best matches sometimes aren’t on televised courts, and in some ways we do end up in a zone where the best we can do is send an ENG or RF camera out to those courts to get bonus coverage, if you will, versus where the tournament and order of play has dictated those matches are.

 

Q.  Showing every match and all that, is there any kind of disadvantage at all for West Coast viewers in the way the new setup will be?

JASON BERNSTEIN:  From a programming perspective there’s an advantage in that the West Coast viewers will get the same thing that our East Coast viewers will see, and that’s been a departure from years past.  Jamie, in terms of approach do you think it’ll be any different?

 

JAMIE REYNOLDS:  No, I think that the tragedy is that it just requires you to get up a little bit earlier.

 

Q.  Well, for some of us that might be a tragedy.

JAMIE REYNOLDS:  No, but the beauty of being live‑live everywhere ‑‑ and again, tennis is a very polarizing sport, and the fans are passionate and ardent supporters of the sport, which is terrific.  But I think as we discussed earlier in terms of the social gratification, if you will, of being in the know, either through text alerts, through online services, what have you, that dynamic is very frequent and urgent, and the tennis community is very committed to following those matches.  Regardless of the time zone, regardless of where we are, we strive to maintain the integrity of that to deliver everything in real‑time.

 

Q.  You talked about expanding the ESPN tennis portfolio.  Is there any plan to expand it beyond the events it has now, which are pretty much only tournaments in the U.S. or Grand Slams?  Any other matches or events around the world?

JASON BERNSTEIN:  Well, our portfolio includes certainly the American‑based tournaments, but also across ESPN3 we carry every major tennis tournament in the world in the thousands and the 500s, as well as some WTA Premier events all season long, and then we do capitalize the season and put a period on the season on TV with both season‑ending championships, the men’s from London and the ladies from Istanbul.  So we do believe we’ve got a very significant portfolio on television and perhaps the largest tennis portfolio online.

 

Q.  Could you ever understand the non‑live broadcast going on the last few years that would cause such an uproar out here?  And also, do you see a story line ‑‑ and maybe this isn’t your bailiwick, but do you see a story line developing that includes the Olympics this year because the Olympics are at Wimbledon, and will you follow it?

JASON BERNSTEIN:  The question is can we understand the non‑live offering?

 

Q.  Yeah.

JASON BERNSTEIN:  I think fans have required live, and that’s what we’re determined to deliver.  The reality of the situation is that other networks over the years have had other commitments, and to defend it is for them to do.  But we know that serving fans live content is what they’ve craved, and in some aspects we’ve been associated with that given the rights that we’ve had in the past few years, and to Jed’s point earlier in the call, just by mere association, but it hasn’t been our issue.  It’s been our goal to ensure live matches are delivered to fans, and we make no bones about that.

 

Q.  As a sports network could you ever imagine not televising a sporting event live?

JASON BERNSTEIN:  Very hard to do.  Given the expanded nature of social media, the immediate need of fans and the importance of the here and now, it is very difficult to ever imagine how we could take a world‑class event and deliver it on tape.

 

Q.  Because the Olympics are at Wimbledon, do you think there will be a story line this year at Wimbledon surrounding the Olympics and will you guys be following that?

JAMIE REYNOLDS:  Yes, we will, and it’s unique because the All England Club has that duality right now of their game plus being host in three weeks’ time to the Olympics.  We do have some stories working on candidly the recovery of the grass, the venue, of how to prep the venue to be an Olympic base in that short turnaround, so there’s certainly that kind of stress, if you will, on the duality of the club.  We’ll be following that.

 

But even on the editorial side, the players on the teams that have been announced and the fact that we have Mary Joe Fernandez on our roster, who’s coach of the U.S. team, there’s certainly some insight there and opportunity to look at how the U.S. if not the world will do, and certainly with guys like Patrick McEnroe or Darren and Brad, certainly opinionated folks relative to what that Olympic experience is all about.  Yes, we do plan on delving into that as it affects this tennis community.

 

Q.  On the same kind of line, whether you could ever imagine a sports network carrying something tape delayed, what kind of thoughts do you have about the way NBC still runs the Olympics and presents them?

JASON BERNSTEIN:  From my perspective I’d rather not make this an NBC or an ESPN thing as much as this is a fan thing, and fans deserve live coverage, and we’re obviously honored to be a part of delivering live coverage here and in a way that it hasn’t been done before.  And we think that whether the event is Wimbledon, the Australian Open or the Euro Championships, fans are way too smart and way too savvy to accept anything other than live.

Tennis Panorama News participates in many tennis media conference calls. “On The Call” serves to give readers an inside view of tennis news.

Share

Getting to Know No. 1 Junior Taylor Townsend

The World’s No. 1 Junior girl Taylor Townsend, from Stockbridge, Georgia participated in a USTA media conference call with General Manager of USTA Player Development Patrick McEnroe on Thursday afternoon. Here is a transcript of the call:

TIM CURRY:  Thanks, everyone, for joining us.  We have with us Patrick McEnroe, the General Manager for USTA Player Development, and Taylor Townsend, who is the No.1 junior girls tennis player in the world.
Wanted you guys to have an opportunity to get to know Taylor a little bit more.  Taylor swept the singles and doubles title at the Australian Open in January, the first American to do that at a Junior Slam since Lindsay Davenport at the ’92 Open.  Since everyone wasn’t in Melbourne, we thought it would give you a chance for you to get to know her before Paris.
With that said, we will start the queue for questions.

Q.  Patrick, when you’re looking for young talent, what is the key thing that you look for?
PATRICK McENROE:  How about desire?  I mean, I think that’s obviously crucial.  Overall athleticism.  Certainly tennis IQ is up there on the list.
But I think the thing I’ve learned in my four and a half years on this job is that there’s a lot of talent out there.  Obviously Taylor is one of those young players.
What helps differentiate the players as they get a little bit older and play with the pressure of obviously high‑level juniors, then start their pro careers is that hunger, that desire to keep working and keep improving.
The trajectory of getting from being a top junior nowadays to becoming a top player in the men’s and women’s game, it’s a little bit longer than it was certainly when I was growing up and playing where you had 16‑, 17‑year‑olds getting to the last four of majors.  Those days are probably over.
That means you really have to have a lot of hunger, have to keep improving.  Taylor has had a lot of success in the juniors.  We hope she continues to do that.
What I’m most proud of about her is that she wants to get better.  She’s working hard, working on her overall game, which is a great tennis game.  She has a lot of natural ability as a player.
What’s going to determine whether or not she makes it to the top of women’s tennis is going to be her desire, her work ethic day in and day out.  Once you start to make that transition to the pros, it’s inevitable that you’re going to suffer some losses, have some bumps and bruises along the way.  The players that are really focused and determined and that can go through that have the best chance of making it all the way to the top.

Q.  What’s the key to that focus?
PATRICK McENROE:  As I said, I think it’s desire to want to get there.  Being the No.1 junior in the world is a great accomplishment.  I can tell you that Taylor has much higher goals for herself.  It’s not going to happen, as I said, overnight.  She’s still quite young and she’s got a couple of years ahead of her to keep playing some juniors and obviously start transitioning to the pros, as well.
We’ll all work with her and her coaches and her parents and everyone on what makes the most sense for her to keep progressing and keep pushing herself to get better.

Q.  We have an incredible situation with the top three or four in men’s tennis.  The younger generation is not breaking through.  Could you comment about the big picture there.
PATRICK McENROE:  Well, when someone like Andy Murray can’t break through and win a major, that tells you how difficult it is.
You’re dealing with, in the men’s game, three of arguably the greatest players of all time.  Certainly if Djokovic can win the French, you have to start thinking of him in those terms career‑wise along with Federer and Nadal.  Those guys have already done it, won all the majors.
It’s pretty amazing when you think in the Open era when Agassi finally did it and won the French, he’s the first guy since the Rocket to win all four majors.  Now you have potentially three players in a row with a chance to do that.
I think it’s really more a testament to how good those three guys are rather than sort of the deficiencies in a Raonic or Ryan Harrison.  They’re young and they have a lot of work to do to keep improving.  The bar has been raised incredibly high.

Q.  Patrick, Taylor doesn’t have a regular game for a junior girl.  She’s very aggressive and looks like she likes to attack the net.  Can you describe her game.
PATRICK McENROE:  I’ll let Taylor answer that first.
Go ahead, T.
TAYLOR TOWNSEND:  Well, I’ve always been comfortable at the net.  When I started playing tennis, we did a lot of volleys.  It was just something that I pretty much just came up with.  It was kind of normal to me.
Now that I’ve been able to travel and see how a lot of other girls play around the world, I see that it’s not really normal.  It’s normal to me, but not normal to other people.
I mean, I’m glad I’m able to have a game that’s different and unique, be able to use it to my advantage.

Q.  Taylor, can you describe your move from California to South Florida.  Did you start at the Plantation or go right to Boca?
TAYLOR TOWNSEND:  I’m originally from Chicago, then I moved to Atlanta.  I mean, my transition, I moved from Atlanta straight to Boca.  I was pretty comfortable with the transition, though.  I was really comfortable with Kathy.  I had been going on trips with her during my eighth grade year.  I was really comfortable with her, the way she coached me.  We had a good connection.  She understood my game, what I needed to do.  She pinpointed some things out to me that were really helpful to continue to help me progress.
We kind of had a good relationship.  So it wasn’t really a hard transition for me.  I was really excited about coming to the program.  I love the environment here.  It’s a lot of fun.

Q.  What is your personal timetable to turn pro?  College or right to the circuit?
TAYLOR TOWNSEND:  I like to keep my options open as of right now.  My goal is to go pro.  Until I feel like it’s the right time, and I consult with my family and everyone, then I’m just going to stay amateur for now.

Q.  Patrick, how significant is it to be the No.1 junior in the world?  We see a lot of guys peter out once they got there.  Remind me of the last few Americans that had that title.
PATRICK McENROE:  That’s a good question.  As Tim says, she’s the first to get to No.1 since Lindsay.  Obviously, those are big shoes to fill.  As Taylor said, she’s on her own timeline.  As long as she keeps working hard and keeps improving and gets in better shape, her overall game is obviously very sound, but everything has to get better.
That will happen in due time.  But, as I said in the answer to my first question, the game is a lot tougher physically now than it’s ever been.  You’re seeing that a lot more in the women’s game in addition to the men’s game.
It takes longer to get there, so you’ve got to keep working.  Taylor, as she talked about, her game is different than a lot of the players.  But she also has to go out there and hit a lot of balls to be able to use her weapons, coming forward, variety, she likes to serve and volley.  You need the other pieces of the puzzle as well.
You can be a great volleyer, but if you can’t move around the court and get to the net, chances are you’ll be exposed the higher level you go.
So I think that’s why you have to continue to work hard all the time.  You have to in some ways be more patient that it’s not going to happen overnight.  We’re not talking about No.1′s from America, but look at No.1′s in the juniors.  You can go down the list in the last 10, 15 years.  It’s not the automatic to be the No.1 junior, to all of a sudden be in the top 5 or the top 10.
TIM CURRY:  As a point, the ITF can’t verify on the weekly rankings whoever has been No.1 since they changed the ranking system in 2004 to the combined singles and doubles ranking, so Taylor is the first American girl to be the No.1 player since ’04.  Prior to that, any of the Americans that were year‑end No.1′s were based on kind of a voting system rather than the ranking‑point formula.
Taylor could definitely be the first American junior No.1 girl under the ITF ranking program.

Q.  Taylor, I was wondering about what you’ve been doing since the Easter Bowl, if you’ve been training on red clay to prepare for the French, and if you’re going to go over and play Belgium first?
TAYLOR TOWNSEND:  After Easter Bowl I came back to Boca for a few days and really hit the fitness pretty hard.  I went to the junior Fed Cup in Mexico.  After that I came back to Boca for two weeks and I really hit fitness really hard.  I just came back last week from Pat Etcheberry’s place in Orlando.  We’ve been working on my fitness and strength.  I’ve been hitting on the clay.
But I’m not playing Belgium.  We’re going to go over to Spain for about a week and train on the red clay.  We’re really familiar with BTT, that’s the academy we’re going to.  We’re really familiar with them.  We went for three weeks last year, so we know the coaches, the drills and everything, so it should be really good.  We should be ready for the French.

Q.  Because of your game style, I don’t imagine red clay is high on your list of favorite surfaces, but how will you adapt to clay?
TAYLOR TOWNSEND:  I really like clay actually.  I can’t speak about grass, I’ve never played on grass.  I love hard court.  I like clay as well.
I think it really helps as far as like my heavy topspin, my slice, using my serve.  I think it’s more about not so much adjusting but it’s more about using the clay, using the surface to my advantage, making more my opponents move.
Obviously the points are going to be a lot longer on the clay.  That’s why we’re working on the fitness, being able to stay in points.  But I think my game is pretty well‑suited for clay, as well.

Q.  Patrick, what are your thoughts about tamping down the expectations of someone who has had the success that Taylor has at this early age?
PATRICK McENROE:  Quite honestly, I was a little torn about even doing this call for that very reason.  I don’t want Taylor to feel too much pressure, she understands what I’m saying, to get too big of a head.
But she’s done great, she’s working very hard.  As she said, Kathy Rinaldi and her have a great relationship.  Kathy has really poured her blood, sweat and tears into not only helping Taylor but Sam Crawford, a number of other girls down if Boca, Grace Min when she was down in Boca.  There’s a nice camaraderie with the girls down there.  Obviously Taylor has some really good friends down there.  That helps a lot when you’re away from home.  That’s difficult.
But I think she’s doing really well.  She’s handling success well.  To win the Australian, I was lucky enough to be there, sit behind Kathy during the last couple of matches, to see the emotion that the two of them had was great to see.  You can tell it means a lot more to them than just a tennis match.  That’s a great sign.  Then Taylor came back and had a great Easter Bowl and won there.
I think she’s handling the success well.  Again, it’s all about coming back, as she said, going back to work, working hard, getting better.  You have to enjoy the process.  You have to enjoy the people you’re working with, the people you’re around.  I think if you do that, in due course the results will come.
If you’re a happy person, you’re happy with how you’re improving, I think that’s what we’re looking for.  Obviously we’re looking for our players to do well, but we’re also looking to create an environment where they’re thriving as people and they’re enjoying themselves and they’re good citizens in addition to being hopefully great tennis players in the future.

Q.  Patrick, I know how hard you’ve worked with player development in the U.S.  If you would take one aspect of any country’s Player Development Program and use it in the U.S., something somebody else has been successful with, what would it be?
PATRICK McENROE:  I’m not skirting that question because I think it’s a good one.  To be honest, I think we’re kind of trying to do it our way.  We are the United States of America.  That’s not to say we haven’t looked at what Spain has done.  This is one of the reasons why we sent our girls over to BTT, which is a tennis academy in Barcelona.  By the way, Jose Higueras will be there with the girls next week.  He has a very good relationship with that academy.
You look at what the French have done with their sort of regional centers.  That’s something we’re trying to do in a similar fashion with our own regional training centers around the country, working more hand‑in‑hand with them, communicating the way we’re trying to coach and hopefully find out from them.  I don’t really think it’s taking one thing.
I remember, when I was playing, the Swedish players.  It wasn’t so much the way they played but their camaraderie.  They supported each other, were out there helping each other.  I think we have that with Taylor and the group of girls that were out there.
It was awesome to see the other girls that were there watching her play.  She won the doubles there with Gaby.  To see them supporting each other, watching each other’s matches, that’s what it’s all about.
I guess if there was one thing I could pinpoint, it’s this being a team effort on our part.  That starts from USTA Player Development, that’s the private academies, the personal coaches.  That’s not always easy to navigate those waters, nor is it easy to have players that are competing with each other out there supporting each other.
I guess that’s the one thing I’d like to see us do more of and I think as a group we are.

Q.  Taylor, now that you’ve won the Australian Open, you’re being compared to Serena and Venus at such a young age, what are your expectations heading into the French?
TAYLOR TOWNSEND:  I mean, I set high expectations for myself for each tournament.  I’ve always kind of lived by the motto that I’m not going to go to a tournament if I don’t feel like I can do well.
My expectations, I’m going to do the best that I can.  But I feel like I can do well at this tournament.  I started off my year great.  I feel like I can continue that success, so…

Q.  You said you’ve never played on grass.  Obviously you’ve played on hard court and clay.  How many times have you played on a clay court?
TAYLOR TOWNSEND:  Well, I’ve played on clay not a lot, but I’ve played on clay a good bit of my life.  Red clay I’ve only played an actual event on red clay one time, and that was in Prostejov in the Czech Republic for the World Junior Cup, I played doubles there.  That’s the only time I’ve had competition on the red play.
But I trained on red clay three weeks last year in Spain.  That’s the last time I was on the red clay.  It should be fun.
PATRICK McENROE:  In all three of our centers, we have the green clay, we have the Har‑Tru.  It’s a little bit different than the red clay.  But we’re having them play as much as possible on the clay to get used to the movement, sliding, patience, building points, all that stuff.

Q.  Patrick, what do you think is the biggest reason why an American hasn’t been able to break through?  We’ve seen John Isner.  But break through and stay there.  If you could say there’s one specific reason, what do you think the biggest reason is?
PATRICK McENROE:  Are you talking about at the French or in general or you don’t know?

Q.  It was more general, but if you want to aim at the French as well.
PATRICK McENROE:  You mean like break through and win a major?  I’m trying to specify what you mean.

Q.  Not just win a major, but stay there, too.  Yes, win a major.
PATRICK McENROE:  I’m trying to think about who else, other than Djokovic, Nadal and Federer, who have.  There’s a short list.
This is what we’re trying to accomplish.  We’re trying to get more kids playing tennis, number one.  It’s the same old refrain:  there’s not one issue.  The issue is that there’s phenomenal athletes playing tennis from all over the world.  We’ve got to do a better job getting those kind of kids playing tennis, then we’ve got to do a better job coaching them and mentoring them as a country.  The USTA, we’ve got to do a better job.
If you do everything right, you’ve got a chance.  You’ve got a chance to make it.
I can’t pinpoint one thing at all.  I think this is a long‑term project, at least for me when I took over this position four years ago.  We’re happy with the progress but we realize we’ve got a long way to go.

Q.  Taylor, possibly a sensitive issue.  You never like to ask a woman about weight issues.  Early on I noticed you were pretty overweight.  I saw you recently and I marveled at how svelte you looked.  Can you talk about your battle with that over the years and what you’ve done to get in better condition.
TAYLOR TOWNSEND:  Well, I’ve always been pretty comfortable with my body.  I know and I’ve been told, it’s obvious for me, that I don’t have a typical body type of everyone else.  Really I just have to work with what I have pretty much.  I use it.  To me it’s been working pretty well (laughter).
Being down at USTA I’ve learned the importance of my fitness level.  I learned that just skill alone, talent, being able to use your hands isn’t always enough.  If I can’t get to the ball, if I can’t stay in the point long enough, I won’t be able to give myself an opportunity to be able to use what I have.
Fitness is really important.  I’ve learned that over the course of these years being here.  I definitely made a transition, a positive transition, in the way that my body has come along.  I think as well as losing weight, dropping weight, but growing as well.
I was young probably when you saw me.  So just being able to grow into my body, get a little taller, all that stuff, it’s helped a lot.  Hopefully I can grow a few more inches.  But I’m just pretty much using what I have.
PATRICK McENROE:  You’re using it pretty darn well, Taylor.  Don’t worry about it.

Q.  How tall are you?
TAYLOR TOWNSEND:  I’m 5’6″ and a half‑ish.

Q.  What junk food have you given up?
TAYLOR TOWNSEND:  I’ve given up a lot actually.

Q.  Your favorite one?
TAYLOR TOWNSEND:  Fast food, like burgers and all that stuff, it makes me sick now.  I can’t eat stuff like that.  Like McDonald’s, fries, all that stuff, if I eat it, I get a bad stomachache.  I’ve given up ice cream.  Went to Froyo.  It’s a little bit healthier.

Q.  What flavor did you give up?
TAYLOR TOWNSEND:  Cookie dough.

Q.  After the Australian I hope you treated yourself.
TAYLOR TOWNSEND:  I had frozen yogurt.

Q.  Taylor, of all the things you do in life, tell us something you want the world to know about you, whether it’s on or off court, that maybe we don’t know.
TAYLOR TOWNSEND:  Well, I love to dance.  I know they all talk about Azarenka, how she dances before she gets ready.  That’s me, too.  When I was at the Easter Bowl, they all talked about how I had on my beads, I was in my zone.  That’s how I get ready for my matches.  I have my music.
I love music as well.  I played the violin for three years in middle school.  I played from sixth to eighth grade.  In my seventh and eighth grade year, I was in honor orchestra.  I’m pretty good at it.

Q.  What kind of music do you play on the violin and what kind of music do you dance to?
TAYLOR TOWNSEND:  On the violin, I play a lot of stuff.  When I was in school, my instructor, she would kind of pick the music out depending on our performance or whatever.  But we did Pirates of the Caribbean, we did Bella’s Lullaby, which is from Twilight.  We do modern stuff, but a lot of different stuff like classical, jazz and blues.  It’s fun.

Q.  Is there a favorite composer in there?
TAYLOR TOWNSEND:  Not really.  I mean, I just recently got my violin fixed.  I started playing again.  But I haven’t played in a while.

Q.  And what do you dance to getting ready for a match?
TAYLOR TOWNSEND:  It depends on my mood.  Sometimes I like to listen to rap, but also it depends how I’m feeling.  Sometimes I listen to rock, sometimes pop.  Now I’ve started listening to house music a lot, so…
TIM CURRY:  Thanks, everyone, for joining us.  Thanks, Taylor and Patrick, for your time.  Taylor’s next event will be the Junior French Open, the second week of the French Open.  Patrick will be there with ESPN.

FastScripts Transcript by ASAP Sports

Townsend and Andrews Take Junior Girls Title

Share

ESPN Tennis Analysts Chris Evert and Patrick McEnroe Talk French Open, Olympics and Wimbledon

On Wednesday, May 23, ESPN tennis analysts Chris Evert and Patrick McEnroe, spoke with the media about the French Open and other tennis topics – notably, the Olympics at Wimbledon.  ESPN2 and ESPN3 will have extensive live coverage of the French Open starting Sunday, May 27.  It will be the first French Open that Evert – who holds a record seven titles in Paris – will work for ESPN.  They were joined by Jason Bernstein, senior director, programming and acquisitions, and Jamie Reynolds, vice president, event production, who each made an opening statement.

 

JASON BERNSTEIN:  For ESPN at the point, I think this has been a special year already for us. After a record‑setting Australian Open men’s final, quality matches at Indian Wells, Miami, Charleston, Monte Carlo, Madrid and Rome, many on ESPN3, now leading to our new all‑live schedule in Paris, tennis has never been as important to ESPN as it is today.  And in just a few short weeks we have the privilege to showcase the championship at Wimbledon in a way fans have never seen before.  So we are really thrilled to be part of this sport and with an industry‑leading production team lead by Jamie Reynolds and the folks on the phone, our tennis fans are in for a treat for the rest of 2012.

 

JAMIE REYNOLDS:  Good afternoon, everybody.  Greetings from Paris.  It is 82 degrees, a beautiful springtime day and there’s a great deal of activity going on at Roland Garros, so those who will have the opportunity to come across later this week, we look forward to seeing you here.

 

This event, our second major of the season, is very exciting as Jason alluded and David mentioned in that we are live, live with the first ball now versus the strategy that we had run with for the last couple of years where ESPN would join the daily schedule in progress, and then backfill the rest of the day with taped programming, taped matches from earlier in the day once the live coverage concluded.  What’s exciting for us now is that with our 11:00 AM local time, 5:00 AM Eastern time, it’s our opportunity to adjust to this sport to this event and treat it with the respect it deserves.

 

Tennis Channel and NBC, as well as Watch ESPN will continue with their quest of televising and carrying this event in addition to what we do to start the day.  We are very happy to be the first voice, if you will, out of the box.  The personalities joining ESPN this year for this event are Chris Fowler and Chris McKendry, both coming from Australia, will be hosting the event joined by Patrick McEnroe, Darren Cahill and Brad Gilbert on the men’s side.  And Chris Evert, this will be her ESPN French Open debut, and we are proud of that.  And she will be joined by Mary Joe Fernandez and Pam Shriver.  So we are looking forward to it, and with that, Chrissie and Patrick McEnroe.

 

Q.  Two for Chris.  I guess the question we all want to ask is, how do you see Serena’s chances of pulling out another French, and also, can you just talk about there’s a large number of American women in the qualifying draw which seems to bode well for the future of American women’s tennis would look like.

CHRIS EVERT:  Yeah, okay.  First, Serena.  Serena, well, she’s undefeated so far as far as match play.  She did pull out of a tournament.  But as far as her current form, she has beaten the top two women in the world with the same for, 6‑1, 6‑3 and has a ranking on Sharapova.  And even back in the States, as far as her win in Charleston, she just blew everybody off the court in this tournament.  So I think Serena is looking pretty good right now.  And I think she very carefully has withdrawn ‑she withdrew  she pulled out of Rome; a few twinges, wants to protect herself and really is gearing up for the French.

 

I just have never seen Serena play this well on clay before, and she has never really come back with as much aggressiveness, and I think her fitness level is higher than we have seen it.  She’s moving better and she wants the French Open really badly.   She’s talked about it all year because it is the one surface that alludes her at times, the clay.  She’s brilliant on the hard court and the grass, but has not had as much success on the clay.

 

So I think you’re going to see a triangle effect here with Sharapova who has also played some great clay court tennis, and Azarenka.   And the big question is, can she continue her dominance on the slower surface versus the hard court which she excelled on the last few months.  It’s really interesting and it’s a tough one to call now.

 

As far as the Americans, I was looking at how many we have in the main draw with obviously McHale leading the pack and we do have a lot in qualifying.  This is what Patrick has been saying all along.  There’s nobody that’s going to blow your socks off; maybe in the last couple of years, there’s been nobody coming up.  But if you look at the names and the ages, and we have a lot of young girls from 16 to 21 who are up‑and‑coming and are really proving to be solid players right now, and I think American tennis is looking great, in the women’s as well as the men’s.

 

Q.  If I could ask Chris and Patrick, if you don’t mind, two questions.  One is a follow‑up on Serena.  What is it exactly that she’s doing better on clay?  Is it just the fitness?  Is it just her hunger?  What do you think it is, why she’s having so much success?  And then I’m just wondering about the American men.  I don’t know if you know what’s going on with Mardy Fish, but is Isner really the only hope at this point for the American men, or what do you see in that regard?

PATRICK McENROE:   First of all, I think Serena is moving better.  I think some of my spies who were there at the Fed Cup when the U.S. played about a month ago, maybe a little more than a month ago, said that she seemed to be very, very determined to get herself in tiptop condition and that maybe she wasn’t quite where she needed to be fitness‑wise in Australia, and that she was determined to not let that happen again.

 

So obviously she’s playing great.  I think the difficulty for her at this point being a little bit older is that I think there’s more of a chance, as we saw in Australia, and you see at times with her, that she can have an off day.

 

And because there’s a lot more depth in the women’s game, yeah, I think the only really fear for her is that she has an off day, or it’s a heavy condition kind of day in Paris where it can get rainy and a little bit windy and cold; so that could be tough for her.  I don’t see her she’s got to find a way to win those matches when she’s not going to be at her best.  Obviously when she’s at her best, she’s the best player in women’s tennis.  I don’t think there’s any doubt about that.  But what’s lacking is the consistency day‑in, day‑out.  So if she can somehow get through that maybe one or two matches that she may have, she’s certainly got a great chance to win it.

 

The other question was about the men, obviously Isner, his season got off to a roaring start with his performances in Davis Cup beating Federer and then winning two matches against the French, which was huge.  He took a little bit of a step back in the last month with some early losses in Madrid and Rome and that’s not that unusual for John to put a couple of great weeks together and then sort of tail off a little bit.  So I saw that he did win a match today in Nice.  I think he needs to get a couple of wins there this week.  But certainly if he can get his game going and get his return game going, he’s got the best chance to make a deep run.  Fish is not playing.  Fish is out of the French.  Still trying to get his health back to 100 percent.

 

Q.  What is it that he has?  I’ve just seen fatigue.  Is there anything beyond that?

PATRICK McENROE:  I’m really not aware of exactly what it is.  I know he has been doing some training at the USTA facility out in California, but he has had a lot of tests done, like some blood tests, so sort of overall fatigue.  So I think it’s more precautionary to make sure that he gets himself back 100 percent physically and health‑wise, and obviously be able to make a run on the grass and obviously in the summer.  So the latest word I’m hearing is that he will be ready to go for the grass.

 

Q.  What about Andy?  What’s going on with him?

PATRICK McENROE:  Well, what’s going on doesn’t seem to be going very well.  He’s played two matches in Düsseldorf and he’s won seven games.  I’m a little surprised that he’s gone there.  Obviously he’s had a hamstring injury which has been nagging him.  And you know, that’s a tough place to start; Düsseldorf, even when he was 100 percent healthy, was always a tough place for him to play with pretty heavy conditions there.  I’m just hoping that he’s healthy and obviously he’s looking at the French to just try to get himself some matches and make a run at Wimbledon, because certainly his chances of doing well at the French are pretty slim.

 

CHRIS EVERT:  Serena, my observation about her, there’s no doubt we all feel that Serena’s fit and when she’s really engaged in what she’s doing out there on the court, and mentally tough; she’s the best player in the world.  I don’t think anybody would disagree with that.  But I think what she’s  I have to really echo Patrick’s thoughts.  I think her mobility and her court coverage has been better.  She’s sliding more natural, and I think you can’t teach anybody how to slide on clay.  It’s very instinctive. She just seems to be very comfortable mobility‑wise as far as the sliding and she’s attacking the ball, mind you, the clay court tournaments she’s won have been faster clay.

 

And again, Patrick nailed it on the head when he said the conditions, depending on the conditions, it could be ‑‑ the clay courts could be the slowest court in the world, or it could be faster than a hard court, depending on the weather conditions.

 

If, again, Serena, she has to hope for the sun to shine and for the court to be faster, because that’s when she’s going to obviously her weapons are going to come through and her speed on the ball and her power on the ball won’t be diffused.  If it’s a heavy day, it will be diffused and somebody like a Azarenka or even a Wozniacki or somebody like that can give her problems.

 

I think I agree 100 percent with Patrick.  Her movement on the court and it’s her eagerness to win the French.  I think all of a sudden, she’s had this tournament set high as far as her goals for this year.  She’s mentioned it more than any other Grand Slam.  And so I have to think that she’s been thinking about it for a long time.

 

Q.  I guess we’ll start with Chris, and Patrick if you want to weigh in, but I was interested in the issue of movement at the French Open.  Chris, particularly with your record there, could you sort of flesh out why movement is so crucial to doing well on the clay at the French?  And as part of that, also, address Sharapova’s ability or lack of ability in that regard; how does she overcome what’s not necessarily natural movement or athleticism that others have?

CHRIS EVERT:  That’s a good question.  I think that the reason I said that, it’s hard to teach how to move.  I think it’s instinctual, and I grew up, since I was six years old, I learned how to play tennis on a clay court.  So I adapted pretty easily.  You can say the same thing about a grass court; you’re going to see a Tim Henman or you’re going to see the grass court, Virginia Wade, or players like that who excel on the grass and maybe struggle with other surfaces because they were brought up on the grass and they instinctively know how to move.

 

I just see Serena sliding, and before, when I saw it, it was awkward for her and she was off‑balance.  And also, maybe wasn’t as light on her feet as she is now.  That has a lot to do with it, too.  Sharapova still takes small … Sharapova to me doesn’t have that natural slide.  When I watched her play a few clay court tournaments, she’s still taking small steps to the ball and not really getting into that slide.  So basically, the movement is important and I think why I was successful, I certainly wasn’t the best mover of any of the girls.  I wasn’t even the top five.

 

But clay gave me a little more time, because it was a little slower in that day.  Obviously the courts or the balls or whatever were slower.  Women weren’t hitting the ball as hard obviously but I had that extra few seconds to get to the ball.  So movement is important, and also, another thing that’s very important is your ‑‑ how can I put it.  You’re taught like how many balls you can keep in the court, and you’re tolerant.  I think in the past, Serena has had a low tolerance as far as she wants to end the point in five or six shots, and I think she’s giving it a few more shots.  Her tolerance is a little bit better now as far as now she’s hitting ten or 12, and I think you can say the same thing with Sharapova.  Both of them seem to have that tolerance and seem to have that much more patience.

 

Q.  Patrick, anything to add?

PATRICK McENROE:  Yeah, sure.  To me, it’s not so much…. it’s how you move to the ball, and the great clay court players sort of understand how to cut the court off and understand how to not slide after the shot.  But a lot of it is balance.  And Chris is 100 percent right.  The more you grow up on it and just are accustomed to it; you know, Roger Federer who is arguably the greatest, certainly if not the greatest player of all time, the greatest grass court player of all time, slides beautifully, because he grew up playing a lot of tennis on clay, he adapts pretty quickly.

 

So for an attacking player, my brother used to love to talk about the fact that it was his ability to cover the net, because he couldn’t plant; he was always sliding around, slip sliding around up at the net.  So I think for Serena, she obviously …she reminds me a little bit of the way Agassi played on clay, which was Andre wasn’t a great slider, but he could play tremendous offense and when he did that with a lot of control, he could beat better movers because he had such good control of the ball and didn’t have to rely on it.  So even though Serena is maybe moving a little bit better, she’s never going to move on a clay court like a Schiavone or even like an Azarenka.  But if she can move, for her, a little bit better and Chris’s point about the shot tolerance is a great one.  She has to just be able to play four or five, six shots cross court until she wants to go for the winner down the line. And if she can do that, she has more firepower than any other players, but she’s also got to have a little more patience than she does certainly on a grass or on a fast hard court.

 

CHRIS EVERT:  Also, Patrick brought up the point of, it’s really hard to slide into a shot and then to get back and recover.  It’s very hard to change direction on clay, and that’s why the volleyers have not been as successful.  I used to love it when Martina came to the net on clay, because No. 1, I felt like I had that one extra second to pass her; but two, if she went to a volley and had to turn around and recover, it’s more awkward, it just takes a lot more work.  It’s a different kind of moving on clay.  I’m going to be watching the sliding and seeing how fast and how quickly they recover after the slide.

 

Q.  John Isner, he has the huge serve which is obvious, but his movement is sometimes questionable on hard courts.  Looks like he’s done pretty good on clay, and what does he need to do?

PATRICK McENROE:  Well, obviously he has a little more time on clay which helps him a lot.  He’s got ….people obviously talk about his serve which is arguably the best in tennis and his kicks are just phenomenal.  But he’s got one of the biggest forehands in the men’s game, and if he has a little time to set it up, it’s a pretty devastating shot.

 

So that combination of that one, two punch is huge.  He’s improved his back hand and his back hand return.  I love what he was able to do in Davis Cup with his coach, Craig Boynton, and Jim Courier in his ear about being more offensive on second serve returns.  He’s got to do that.  He’s not going to out…run Nadal or Djokovic and Murray, or any of these guys on clay or a Federer. But he can out‑hit them and his movement has gotten  better and his fitness is obviously better.  And I really think that last year when he took Nadal to five was sort of the start of his reemergence and now become a Top‑10 player.  Once he saw that he could win two sets off Nadal at Center Court at the French Open, he realized that if he could get himself in tiptop shape and get that belief that he can get these guys ‑‑ so he’s had some huge wins this year, beating Djokovic on hard court was a monster one.

 

Now, as dangerous as he is against the top players, he’s also vulnerable to losing to pretty much anyone; meaning someone that can hit a lot of balls and make a lot of shots.  So that would be the one concerning thing for Isner.  If he plays a reasonable clay court player in the first or second round, that could be a dangerous match for him, because based on the way he’s played the last month, it seems like he’s lost a little bit of his confidence in his return game, and that can make it difficult for him.  He beat Malisse 6‑6.

 

You get into a match like that at the French against someone that’s even more comfortable than Malisse on a clay court….so to me, he has a huge upside.  I said earlier this year that I believe he could be playing in the final weekend at the French, and a men’s final four.  I think he’s got the game to go that far.  But if he’s not careful, he could also go out in the first round.

 

CHRIS EVERT:  Also, his serve is so dominant, but his Achilles heel has been his return serve and perhaps if it’s a slow clay court, he can get that extra split second to take the time to make a good return.  Maybe that might help his return game.

 

Q.  Jamie, wonder how would you evaluate the reporting in journalism that you guys have done during coverage of your tennis majors?

JAMIE REYNOLDS:  Well, I think actually we are pretty solid and pretty strong at being in the moment and trying to extend the stories to be as judicious in the way that we are conveying any reports.  I suppose we ought to clarify an example if you have one or a thought, whether it’s breaking news on injuries or perhaps something a little bit deeper regarding the overall arch of the sport.

 

Q.  Essentially asking an open‑ended question.

JAMIE REYNOLDS:  From our standpoint, we have a very deep roster of 11 to 12 talent that are well‑versed in both the athleticism and personalities and dynamic nature of the sport and for many of them who have come through our ranks over the last ten plus years, they have a very solid barometer on journalistic integrity and content.  So I think accentuating an event over a 14‑day stand, I think they are well‑versed in that ability.     The thing to keep in mind is when you look at the balance of whether it’s a Chris Fowler or Chris McKendry or Mike Tirico who joins us, as well as the personalities ranging from Chris Drysdale to Chrissie to Patrick to Mary Joe that we have got a lot of folks that have disparate opinion and the ability to speak on a number of issues.

 

Q.  Nadal seems to have solved Djokovic in 2012, is the men’s title between these two and is the winner a favorite to pull off the French/Wimbledon double?

PATRICK McENROE:  Well, clearly Djokovic has not been as dominant as he was in 2011.  I don’t think anybody thought that he could do that.  That being said, he’s won the Australian Open.  He’s won a Masters event down in Miami, and he’s played pretty well on the clay but he’s lost to Nadal twice.  He’s obviously been gunning for the French.  If he can win this, you know, that would be four in a row, which would obviously be pretty remarkable when you consider who he’s up against and the fact that he’s been competing against two of the greatest players of all time, and so he would be quickly inserting himself into that conversation if he could somehow pull off the French.

 

That being said, I think based on what’s happened in the last month, that Nadal is certainly proving that he’s still the man to beat at the French; or he’s got his confidence back and the fact that he’s been able to beat Novak twice in a row, certainly bodes well for him if they play in the final.  I would not necessarily say that if Nadal wins the French, he’s the favorite at Wimbledon.  I think I would say that about Djokovic; that if he were able to  I think he’s a little more comfortable making that quick switch but obviously Nadal has been amazing the last couple of years.  He’s been almost as effective on grass as he’s been on clay, at least getting to the Wimbledon final numerous times and winning a couple. ‘

 

So it’s a great question.  I mean, I think don’t underestimate Roger, because I think he’s played awfully well this year, too.  I think if anyone had told you at the beginning of the year that he would win two Masters events and be as consistent as he’s been, I think he would maybe have taken that bet against it happening.  So clearly he’s not the favorite at the French, but I think he’s played well enough and played enough matches to where he’s got to be there in there … he’s got to be as confidence as he’s been going into the French in the last couple of years.

 

Q.  I wanted to ask your thoughts on players like Berdych, Del Potro, Almagro, or guys that maybe could go deep.  And for Chris, if you could just maybe reflect a little on your ’85 final, the win over Martina, because that was a classic match, and I wondered if you can talk about you doing the little things like getting fitter and using your variety after 30, how that helped you, and how that could help Serena in terms of the fitness and playing maybe more angles, mixing up the pace, stuff like that.

CHRIS EVERT:  When people ask me what my favorite Grand Slam win was, I always say the ’85 French, because at that point, I don’t remember if I was 30 or 31, but I was in my early 30s.  Basically everybody had counted me out as far as winning anymore Grand Slams.  At that point Martina and Steffi and Sabatini and Seles; everybody was focusing on them.

 

You’re right, the match was a very seesaw, up and down match.  At one point I was serving at 5‑All in the third, Love‑40 knowing that one point away ….all she had to do was hold her serve and for some reason I pulled it out and I was up 6-5 with Martina serving and then I broke.

 

Before that match, I had lost to her 13 times in a row over 2 1/2 years, and I beat her one time at Key Biscayne and then the French.  So that was my second win after 13 times in a row.  And I did change my game.  I did start coming in to the net a little bit more.  I did develop a little bit, I would say a bigger serve but for me it was a bigger serve, and I just had to go into the gym more, and if you can’t beat ‘em, join ‘em.  I tried to get into better shape.  So that was the beauty of Martina and our rivalry was we both kept pushing each other.

 

As far as Serena, I have to agree with Patrick once again, when you think of Serena and you think of Roger and the biggest fear that I have for them is, can they keep it up in a two‑week period, because I very well remember at the end of my career, prime example at the U.S. Open, I beat Monica Seles two‑love and then the next rounds I lost to Zina Garrison who I had never lost to; I just couldn’t get psyched up for it.

 

The problem when you’ve played for so many years, and you start to get a little bit mentally burned out, it’s hard to keep up that standard mentally as well as physically for two weeks.  So I don’t really think  I think that Serena, the only thing she’s had to add to her game right now is just to be fitter.  And I think that’s translating into, she’s moving better, and mentally maybe to stay in the point a little bit longer.  But other than that, I can’t … you really can’t pick at her game too much right now.

 

Q.  Patrick, can you talk about those players, the second tier guys that might go deep?

PATRICK McENROE:  I think that the guy with the best shot is Berdych.  He has a lot of confidence and some of what he does also depends a little bit on the conditions.  Probably the quicker, the better; if he’s playing against certain guys, but he’s also improved and beat Murray a couple of years ago on a very, damp date day and has a lot of five firepower.  To me he has the best shot, and you have some that are ranked just above him but I don’t see him being able to go the distance over five sets on the clay.     You know, he’s obviously going to have the home support there and to me he’s a better two‑out‑of‑three‑set player because he’s a high‑energy kind of guy and his body I think doesn’t recover as well.  So I think that’s a factor for him.  Berdych is a better hitter of the ball and he has more natural firepower.

 

Del Potro has been solid, but quite frankly, he’s been maybe just a little disappointing.  It’s hard to say that, because he’s worked his way back and he’s in the Top‑10.  But I think a lot of us were expecting him to be right back in contention at the majors on a regular basis.  Whether that’s just a testament to how good the top three are, is probably more the case.  But you know, I expected him to be right there knocking on the door of the top five.  Even though he’s in the Top‑10, he’s a long way from being in the top four, if you look at the point differential, he’s way back in the pack.  So I don’t see him being a threat to go all the way.  Otherwise, he’s got the firepower to do some damage.

 

The other guys you look for, I think Almagro, he’s certainly got a great clay court game.  If he can avoid Nadal, you’ve got to like his chances.  Ferrer is always around in the fourth round of the quarters.  I would look at Berdych and I would probably look at Almagro, the other outsider there, outside the top big three.  I think it’s also worth mentioning that Murray has had a pretty miserable clay court season.  I think after a great performance at the Australian where he very nearly beat Djokovic and played a great match, I think he’s taken a step back on the clay.

 

Q.  Question about Rafa and the question of the greatest male clay courter of all time, do you think that the seventh French Open is necessary for Rafa to make that claim, and do you think that he’s neck and neck with Borg and that makes this year’s French Open a little extra special?

PATRICK McENROE:  Well, for the sake of creating some buzz, I would say yes.  But to be perfectly honest, no.  I don’t think it’s necessary.  I think he’s already proven his record, not only at the French Open, which he’s obviously No. 1, but I think his record in the big other clay court events, you have to take into account.  Now, you could argue that, well, Borg didn’t have as many of them at that time, which is true, but you also have to take his record in Davis Cup on clay, which is ridiculous, the number of matches he’s won, best‑of‑five on clay in Davis Cup is through the roof.  So to me, he’s the greatest clay courter ever, already.  To me, what he’s chasing is trying to chase down Roger, and get into the conversation of being the greatest of all time, and the greatest of this era; and if it wasn’t for a guy named Djokovic, he might be knocking on the door of doing that.

 

It’s funny the way it’s turned out, when Roger was preventing him from winning a lot of majors and all of a sudden he gets over the Roger hump and he gets to No. 1; and then all of a sudden Djokovic does what he does last year, and takes a couple away from Rafa.  So to me if Nadal can figure out a way to get close to Federer in the all‑time, if he ends up with just for the sake of argument, 14 or 15 and Federer ends up with either where he’s at or maybe wins one more; but Nadal beats him a couple more times in big matches head‑to‑head, I think you would have to put his record up there against Federer’s; and obviously taking into account their head‑to‑head, and also their record in Davis Cup and also the fact that Nadal has won the Olympics and we’ll see what happens this summer.

 

So I think that this next few months for tennis is going to be pretty unreal, with the French, Wimbledon, the Olympics and the Open.  Imagine how different things are going to be at the end of the U.S. Open, and I think that’s what makes this time of year always so exciting.  But when you fill the Olympics into it  and these guys and girls, women, I should say, they are gunning for the Olympics in a big way.  I think it’s been great for tennis how the Olympics has grown in stature every Olympic Games.  These players, now they are really pointing to the Olympics as much, if not more, as they are pointing to these next three majors that are coming up.

 

CHRIS EVERT:  If I can mention that with these three men you’ve just mentioned, I’ve never seen an era like this before.  I don’t think you can compare it to any other era, because of Davis Cup and because of the Olympics, and because of the Grand Slams and because they compete pretty much week‑in and week‑out and they compete with each other.  Nobody is dodging each other.  I have never this could play out in the next five years that these players, I don’t know about Federer, but the other two, this could play out that these three players are the greatest of all time.

 

Q.  And you’re of the belief that Nadal has already superseded Borg as the best male clay courter?

CHRIS EVERT:  I am not a fan of comparisons of different eras.  Never have been.  I just ….because you’re as good as your competition, and Björn, quite frankly, there wasn’t the depth there is now, but he was winning pretty easily on the clay.  I’m just …I don’t like to compare.  I think Nadal, his record speaks for itself.

 

Q.  Getting back to del Potro, Patrick mentioned that people are disappointed that he has not been able to break back into the top 5.  Curious your thoughts as to why he has not been able to do that and what he might need to do to get back to the Top‑5?  And your quick thoughts on what Venus has done to get back into contention for the Olympics.

PATRICK McENROE:  Well, the del Potro question is a good one.  There’s no easy answer other than as I said earlier, the top guys are just so darned good now, that it’s ….I think look at Andy Murray.  This guy has won the almost as many Masters as the top three but he cannot break through at a major, that’s how good of a player Murray is, and he still can’t do it.  Del Potro, he’s a big guy and all things being equal, I will still take a guy who is 6‑2, 6‑3 on a tennis court over a guy who is 6‑9, 6‑10 just based on pure mobility, because tennis is running sport and tennis is a game of changing direction, etc.  …  So like on a basketball court, if you take a guy who is 6‑8 or 6‑3 and they have similar skills, you’ll take the guy who is 6‑8 because he can shoot over; in tennis, it’s the opposite.

 

So I think that works against him to some extent.  I think the fact that he’s won the U.S. Open, he’s a huge star and celebrity in Argentina for the rest of his life.  And he’s kind of a big Teddy bear.  And I say that; does he have the desire, the absolute intense focus that it takes?  Imagine to beat to have to beat two of those guys, Nadal, Federer and Djokovic to win a major.  Nobody has been able to do it, other than him, at least back when he won The Open.  So just it’s a couple of different things and I think there’s just maybe that X‑factor has been lacking in addition to the fact that just mobility‑wise, he’s already playing at a disadvantage to the same way that Isner is.

 

CHRIS EVERT:  As far as Venus, she looked good back in Miami.  That was her first tournament back where she beat Kvitova and Ivanovic; and she reached the quarters and everybody was surprised at how well she did and she reached the quarters in both Charleston and Rome.  You know, I don’t think that ….I don’t put any money on her as far as doing well on the clay.  I think that if she’s going to do it well at any Grand Slam, it’s going to be Wimbledon, where again, she moves very nicely on the grass.  She’s very comfortable, she’s won there so many times, and the points are shorter.  I think Venus, I don’t know, she’s one of the older players again and you just have to wonder if there’s motivation every single day.  I think at this point, she should be ‑‑ she’s so happy to be back playing and feeling better and feeling healthier, and knowing that she’s got a another shot at her tennis, but I just don’t see the burning desire to win, and the confidence to go along with it right now.  What do you think, Patrick?

 

PATRICK McENROE:  Well, Venus, she’s had to overcome so much with her health and injuries.  I’ve always thought that Venus technically is not as sound of a player as her sister is.  So I think because of all that, it’s tougher for her to come back.  She’s a great athlete, obviously, and she’s a phenomenal competitor.  But she has some real holes in her game, on the second serve, on the forehand.  There are some things that can really break down technically.  Where it’s harder for her, I believe, therefore, to come back from the various injuries, etc., and to not play that much; Serena is just a better natural tennis player.  She has better technique on her shots.  So for her, I think it’s a little bit easier to come in and out the way she has.  But I’m just happy to see Venus back.  She’s got a great outlook.  She’s definitely capable of getting hot and stringing together some wins, certainly on the grass she’s going to be very dangerous and you would hope at the U.S. Open.  But obviously the French is going to be even on her best of days, is tricky for her.

 

Q.  Last year we asked early and often whether Roger had it in him to win another slam and you both thought he could and now a year later, he hasn’t.  What are your feelings on whether you expect to see Roger holding up another slam this year, or the Olympics?

PATRICK McENROE:  Well, I’m actually a little more optimistic now than I’ve been in, say, the last year and a half.  I think he’s playing better.  Now again, it goes back, same old, same old.  I mean, the two other guys ahead of him are so darned good.  And I think for him, it was a little bit of a tease that he got to No. 2 for a week, because I thought, boy, if he can be a second seed, going into the French and Wimbledon as opposed to being a 3‑seed, that would make to me his chances quite a bit better, because then he wouldn’t have to necessarily go through both guys.  Now he’s got to beat … as the seedings go, he’s got to beat both Rafa and Novak back‑to‑back, which he obviously can do, but is tough to do.  If you put a gun to my head, I would say that he will win another major.  Obviously Wimbledon you would think is his best chance, even though he’s been picked off the last two years there.  But he’s been picked off by big hitters and by guys that got very hot on the day.  That’s still the surface, where there are far fewer guys that can pick him off.  He’s most comfortable.  Certainly he can do it at the Open.  You know, I wonder if you said to him, would he rather win Wimbledon or win the Olympics, I wonder what he would say.  I’m not sure at this point.  But the answer is, I absolutely think he can.

 

CHRIS EVERT:  I think that’s a good question about the Olympics.  I think about that often, what would the players, if they were to pick, a Grand Slam or the Olympics.  That’s a good question.  I think …..I have a feeling Roger might pick Wimbledon, and I don’t know why, just kind of feel that way.  The thing with Roger is ….and the Olympics is two‑out‑of‑three sets; correct?

 

PATRICK McENROE:  Yes.

(Note, he later amended that: And I just have to make one qualification.  That is that the men’s competition is best‑of‑three up until the final.  The finals of the Olympics, just for the men’s singles final, is best‑of‑five sets.  Otherwise it’s best‑of‑three.)

 

CHRIS EVERT:  Well, Roger has a better chance in a two‑out‑of‑three set match, I feel, against either one of those other players than three‑out‑of‑five.  I don’t think the French is going to be the title he’s going to win, because … I just look at them physically, and you look at Djokovic and you look at Nadal physically, and they are animals and they can stay out there all day.  Roger is a shot‑maker.  Roger, I don’t think he could stay out there for five sets with both of those players and beat them.  I doubt that he’s going to win the French. Wimbledon, the points are shorter.  He gets a little more excited.  If that forehand is working and he’s slapping it and it’s going in on return serves and he can come into the net and he can sneak into the net, that’s very possible, and the U.S. Open is possible.  I still think between Wimbledon and U.S. Open and the Olympics, I think that he will win one of those; or maybe I’m just hoping.

 

Q.  An Olympic question for both of you.  Can you talk about how usually tennis is not that big of a deal, not that high profile of an event at the Olympics but this year because it’s at Wimbledon and such a storied location, do you think that will raise the profile of the sport as an Olympic sport?

PATRICK McENROE:  I absolutely do.  I think the buzz is going to be phenomenal.  Wimbledon, the All England Club has been preparing for this for a long time as far as getting the grass ready and the changeover that has to be done and players will be able to wear the colors of their countries.  So there’s a lot of differences that will be happening.  So I think it will be amazing.  I think it will be awesome to see, and you know, tennis, obviously, has some of the most recognizable athletes on the planet.  You know, particularly on the women’s side.  I think that certainly raises the profile, but I think having it at Wimbledon is a huge boost to the event.  I was lucky enough to be the Olympic coach for the U.S. when the Games were in Athens, and you know, it was obviously an amazing experience.  But the venue and being where it was, once you got on the grounds of the venue, it felt like a Tour event, a regular Tour event.  I think having it at Wimbledon will obviously boost what it’s about in a big way.  So I think it will be incredible.

 

Q.  Do you think that it will  can it boost the sport just internationally?  Do you see it as a boost for the sport that it’s going to be played at Wimbledon and will probably get some nice TV coverage from Wimbledon, for people who don’t necessarily watch tennis?

PATRICK McENROE:  Well, there’s no doubt, because I get asked this question a lot, so one of my answers is tied into this; the Olympics have popularized tennis in a lot more places around the globe already.  I mean, without tennis being in the Olympics, there will probably not be a Li and other players that have come out of China and there may not be a Marco Baghdatis, or there may be.

 

You’re seeing a lot more countries, certainly the Eastern European countries; the profile of the Olympics has been raised considerably since tennis came back into the Olympics in the mid 80s.  In my mind, that will just continue.  That’s why the ITF is so behind it and why they have gotten even tougher about the rules about the players having to represent their country to play the Olympics.

 

When we were playing, even the last 15, 20 years, when tennis first came in, it was, well, nice to have tennis back in the Olympics but won’t it be great if it were a team sport.  I used to say that all the time.  And part of me would still like to see that but there’s no chance that’s going to happen.  The fact is, when you’ve got these players, which is great, for Djokovic and Davis Cup, the Olympics, in his country, it’s massive.

 

To Chris’s previous point about Roger comes from the old school tennis, but I think if you were to ask a lot of the younger players that are coming up, particularly from the international countries, they might say they would rather win the Olympics.  If you ask the players from China, I think they won the doubles in the last Olympics and that was just monumental for them to win for China. So that’s the long answer to the question and the short answer is absolutely it will raise tennis’s quotient around the world.  There’s no doubt about it.

 

CHRIS EVERT:  Two things.  First of all, I think that I’ve never heard the players talk about the Olympics so much as long as the Olympics have been going on, and I think that’s giving it tremendous press and coverage around the world, because they never would talk about Greece or Korea or when the Olympics were there as much as they are giving it such great publicity and such great press.  It’s on everybody’s mind.

 

Second of all, I think tennis is getting bigger in the Olympics as time goes on.  I was in the first Olympics in Seoul, Korea.  Unfortunately for me it didn’t turn out that well, and actually, I would like to say that I was the only American to go home without a medal in Seoul, Korea.  So I was a little disappointed about that.

 

But the day before I played my match, I was walking around the village and going to watch Flo‑Jo and Carl Lewis and Ben Johnson and going to watch gymnasts.  I was a fan.  I felt like I was a kid in a candy store.  I was so excited about seeing all of these athletes that I had grown up watching on TV.

 

And in the opening ceremonies even, I felt very uncomfortable and I almost felt like an imposter, because the other athletes were looking at us tennis players as if they were saying, what are you doing here, because we have our Wimbledon and U.S. Open and French and Australian, and we had our million dollars.  These were supposedly amateur athletes who only had one chance every four years.

 

So consequently, I never really felt ….I was really excited to be there.  But when I went to play my match the next day against Raffaella Reggi at nine o’clock in the morning, and 50 people showed up in the stands, I lost my match and it was really kind of the low part of my whole experience in Korea.  But the point I’m trying to make is, every two or four years, when tennis has been in the Olympics, it’s gotten a little bit bigger and it’s gotten a little bit more exposure and it’s belonged a little bit more.  And now, I think it’s like night and day as far as where tennis is in the Olympics compared to in ’89 when I went.

 ESPN French Open Schedule

Share