Post-U.S. Open thoughts on scheduling, TV coverage; more mail
• Sure. If some
In all seriousness, I'm out of my depth here, but I tend to agree with
The USTA might, ultimately, be correct in their claims that the stadium is too big and that a roof would be prohibitively expensive. But, don't insult us with the assertion that building a roof would divert funds from our grassroots programs. That's a false dichotomy.
• This session was created almost -- gulp -- a decade ago, to take advantage of the Williams-Williams juggernaut. Suffice to say, neither the USTA nor CBS was envisioning snoozers (among non-Williams players) the likes of which we saw the other night.
• To use
• Agree and disagree. It's easy to say that in hindsight. But Venus fizzled at Wimbledon. She played zero events on hardcourts coming in. And she hadn't won a U.S. Open since 2001. I don't think you blame people for suspecting that Clijsters or Wozniacki would post a superior result. I'm really puzzled by Venus. She's 30, but she's a young 30 -- the legacy of playing a sensible schedule all those years. Yet, a few points from reaching the final (and a booking against
• I tried to suppress that memory. A friend of mine raised a good point: The Internet lets us see the degeneration of American culture in real time. In the comments section after the fight video, people were actually supporting
• It's true, these sessions are seldom the source of much insight. (It would be nice if the questions were a bit more probing. "You must be excited for this opportunity?" does not lend itself to a killer answer.*) I can only think of one instance off-hand that provided much in the way of entertainment. Minutes before taking the court,
Overall, though, I don't mind these segments. You get to see the players up close. ("Did you know how pretty her eyes are?" my daughter asked me after seeing Zvonareva.) You get to hear their voice. You get to see what they're carrying. There's some value there even if there's no nutritional value to the Q & A.
• These questions only make you enemies. This is a pretty good belly-up-to-the-bar discussion. Among the following three-Slam winners, whom to do you like best? I could see Clijsters getting knocked for only having won one of the majors three times. But I think Philip's equation stands up pretty well.
• Let's table this. Whenever Nadal loses early (see: Cincinnati) the Federerphiles use it as evidence that the head-to-head record is misleading. When Federer loses before the appointed time (see: U.S. Open) the Rafael-ites fire back. Here's my take: Does the head-to-head ledger cut against Federer's primacy? Absolutely. Does it preclude our considering him the best ever? No. Is there value in considering how Nadal and Federer fare when they face off? Yes. Can this data be manipulated? Yes. Is it a way to assess their relative strengths? Yes. Is it dispositive? No.
• In part because of the scheduling, in part because he lost the "other" semifinal, Youzhny didn't get enough credit this event. An awfully nice on his part. As for one-handed backhands, he's up there. I'd include
• To borrow from Pat McEnroe, "I couldn't disagree more." I think your mistake was the box tickets. The beauty of the early rounds of a Slam: you get to watch the "big names" wax some qualifier. Not usually gripping drama, but you can cross it off your bucket list. Then you can mosey the grounds and find two lesser players locked in five sets. So long as TV is calling the shots, you're not going to see, say,
• Sure, thanks again.
• I couldn't believe Pam said that. Then I found the video, and, sure enough you're right. But it came across as playful, not offensive. Context. I hear what you're saying about the double standard, but I don't think it's a symmetrical comparison. Different power dynamic and all.
• Let's cut to the chase here: Brad Gilbert is a bottomless source of comedy, some of intentional, some of it un-.
• The ATP and FedEx have signed a three-year agreement that brings FedEx on board as a new global platinum sponsor and official carrier of the ATP World Tour. The sponsorship will launch at the 2010 Barclays ATP World Tour Finals in November and extend through 2013.
• As many of you note, surely this was the only time a player (Clijsters) won a major and DROPPED two slots in the rankings!
• The International Tennis Hall of Fame & Museum has announced the election of 11 new members to the Board of Directors. The new directors were all elected at the Hall of Fame's Annual Meeting in New York. The new directors are
• Wozniacki fans, check out the forthcoming book "Én bold ad gangen" by
• ESPN, Inc. and Tennis Australia have reached a new 10-year extension through 2021 of ESPN's multimedia coverage of the Australian Open. Having televised the Australian Open -- including the women's and men's semifinals and finals exclusively -- since 1984, this is ESPN's longest uninterrupted professional sports programming relationship.
• Tennis Channel chronicles the renovation of Centennial Tennis Center in Nashville, Tenn., on its new program, Community Surface, which premiered Monday.
• Heartfelt thanks to everyone who assisted with the "title search" for the sports-freakonomics book. Alas, we had to reject "Johan Kriek-anomics" and went with "Scorecasting." You guys were were immensely helpful.
• Love to stay and chat more, but whoa, 10:15 football time! Have a good week, everyone!