How Good Can Carlos Alcaraz Get?
Hey everyone….a post-Miami Mailbag….
Lots of questions and remarks about Miami. Carlos Alcaraz, of course, won the men’s title, beating Casper Ruud in the final. That Alcaraz possesses vast potential has been an open secret for years. That he is realizing this bottomless potential still a month shy of turning 19, well, that is remarkable. I liken this to Nadal in 2005 insofar as it feels like an exercise in glimpsing the future. The Alcaraz game is complete. His work ethic is complete. There is style. There is also substance—not least this unscripted bit of sportsmanship. A few cynics have murmured “let’s see him do it in best-of-five format,” but his game and constitution seem perfectly well-suited to knock-down-drag-outs. Nadal and Djokovic will be your French Open favorites. But how is this kid not third?
On the women’s side, Iga Swiatek played up her ranking. The new No.1 committed to the role, winning her third straight event. She’s ancient compared to Alcaraz…she will turn 21 during the French. And she, too, is build to last. She doesn't just have an athletic, durable, power-hungry game, but also real perspective and likability.
There’s a larger point here. As long as the sport persists in minting champions, it will persist period. We wring our hands about life after the Big Three. We wring our hands about the WTA’s winsome No.1 retiring at age 25. Writ small and writ large, Swiatek and Alcaraz remind us of the same principle: great players set standards…that others will eventually meet.
Mailbag
Just a question/comment regarding the various debate points around whether or not Russian players should be allowed to compete under neutral flags. I see people debating the issue almost entirely around what is or is not fair to those players. Why isn’t the primary focus of any of the discussions what is the most effective way to support Ukraine? To me that should be the only factor in deciding. If excluding the Russian players would dampen the morale of one Russian soldier or cause one Russian citizen to question their government, then in my opinion it is worth it to exclude them. “Fairness” is by far a secondary effect to the decision.
—Ken Stamper
• I understand the impulse to punish the vile and cowardly Putin. I get the temptation to use the soft power of sports here. I get that, yes, in war, the usual norms are suspended. But I think we need to ask ourselves: A) Is this really a precedent we want to set, asking athletes to take loyalty oaths? B) Doesn’t the patent unfairness—and even danger—to the individual athlete take precedence over a symbolic message? C) Does this really further the cause? That is, doesn’t allowing Russian players to compete, despite the abominations of their delusional autocrat, enhance, not undercut, liberal democracy? Two side points. As Ken notes, a more fruitful exercise would entail going to extreme measures to support the Ukrainian players, trying to play on in the face of great trauma. Wouldn’t they have benefitted more from Miami Open wild cards than the usual cohort of IMG clients? Isn’t this Russia chatter yet another example of precisely why the players need a formal union? If this advances from idle thought exercise to actual policy, who is fighting for the players’ rights here?
Is John Isner’s Sunshine Double(s) success a one-off (or two-off, as the case may be), or do you see him having a future as a doubles specialist?
—Rebel Good, Mountain Park, NC
• First off, all credit and congratulations to Isner. Given his game, his serve and his deceptively good hands, this late-career doubles success isn’t a total shock. But still, Isner’s success is a real testament to his professionalism. He’s almost 37 and he’s out there taking doubles titles. With two different partners, Jack Sock and Hubie Kurkacz? As far as becoming a doubles specialist….Tom of Durham, NC notes that Isner has gone more than a decade without playing doubles at a Major. Making that shift often depends on how players answer a series of questions: Am I ready to declare an end to my singles play? How much do I enjoy competing? How much do I enjoy life on tour? How does that balance with family? (Note that Isner has a wife and multiple kids.) Can my ego handle being part of a duo? For some players, transitioning to doubles specialist holds appeal. For others it’s a transition they’re not interested in making.
Hello Jon, I hope you are well. I wanted to ask a favor. While on the DraftKings Tennis Channel Live, presented by DraftKings, in between the segments presented by DraftKings using the DraftKings odds for the panel to pick winners of tennis matches and teaching audiences how to wager on tennis matches, could you maybe talk about the recent NFL gambling news and the potential dangers to the integrity of sports? I’m sure tennis players will never be tempted to earn a little extra, especially the players ranked out of the top 100, since they make such a great living and definitely don’t need money while they're paying for their own expenses traveling around the world. Sarcasm aside, maybe I’m way off base here and don’t understand the intricacies of sports gambling. It just seems that the NFL has made their bed, and now they have to lie in it. I can only hope that tennis isn’t flying too close to the Sun as well. But maybe I have to see it from Mr. Gecko’s point of view...”Greed is good”.
—Respectfully, Anthony
• Three years ago I did a 60 Minutes piece on sports gambling. And, three years later, I’m really torn on the subject. I share some of your concerns. At a minimum, it’s inconsistent that leagues are banning athletes for betting and also monetizing sports gambling. (Reductio ad absurdum: the ATP’s Bet-at-home Open, a tournament at which the players would have been banned for using the sponsor’s product.) Especially as we go down the sports food chain there is, undeniably, a temptation to manipulate results and undermine honest competition. Is a top player susceptible to match-fixing? Not so much. Is the No. 400 player competing in some ITF event where the prize money doesn’t cover T/E? The historical record speak for itself. (Digression: when he is not overseeing a Miami-based tennis tournament or developing properties in Manhattan where Russian oligarchs and Chinese nationals park their money or swaying political races, Stephen Ross owns an NFL team. Recently, a former employee accused him of offering a bounty to lose games, or, in effect, manipulate results. Can someone explain why a player betting on a game is suspended, while an owner facing credible allegations of, effectively match-fixing, is not sanctioned?)
Where were we? Right. I understand the objections and concerns. But I am generally okay with the sports world embrace of gambling. I think there’s credence to the argument that people are going to bet on sports anyway, whether it’s legal or not. Better to do this out in the open where, yes, leagues get in on the action, but there’s also better detection. Sunshine as disinfectant and all. Also, I would rather the sports economy—athletes, leagues, media—reap some of the benefits of this commerce, than corner bookies and Vegas sports books.
Also, on libertarian grounds, I’m okay with sports gambling. I may not choose to buy lottery tickets. I may not choose to buy virtual currency just because of a cute dog logo. But I’m not comfortable legislating against either. What about problem gambling? It’s a concern. But you could say this about any potentially addictive behavior. X percent of people buying beer or playing slot machines won’t do so responsibly. We still have bars and casinos. I also feel like sports wagering is consistent with the essence of being a sports fan. For so many, there is something inherently speculative. We’re always predicting and prognosticating and convinced that our intuition is superior. Why were we so obsessed with the World Cup draw? Why do we love March Madness brackets? NFL mock drafts? Why are we either drooling about Carlos Alcaraz or suggesting we need to see his best-of-five results? There’s something inherently forward-looking about being a sports fan. If fans, confident in their predictive powers, want to make a wager, it deepens their interest level and hardens their fandom….I’m not sure it’s reasonable to ask sports to ignore this instinct. I’m not sure it’s reasonable to ask sports to ignore this potential windfall.
The bloke who queried Barty and advertising/commerciality is obviously not familiar with Vegemite (or Bartymite as it is often called over here). Being known is a relative thing.
—@champidiot
• One could argue that citing a Vegemite campaign is not the strongest defense to the charge that Barty has kept a low commercial profile…but duly noted. I do stick by my original point. Agenting is a commission-driven business. There is every incentive for agents to set up deals and take their slice. There are all sorts of examples of sports agents running their clients ragged. (And —sports dirty secret alert— encouraging them to endorse pharmaceutical products they have never used, for conditions they’ve never had.) I give Barty’s team a lot of credit for letting her call the shots, stay true to her value/priorities and leaving lots of money on the table.
Tennis edict: you cannot mention Vegemite without alluding to the time a yeast extract trolled Sharapova.
Who’s had the better career, Naomi Osaka or Ash Barty?
—JD Parker
• Good one. The obvious preface: one player is retired and one is active. But if we froze time today? Damn, that’s really close. Osaka leads the Majors 4-3. Barty has won three different ones; while Osaka has won the U.S. Open and Aussie Open twice but—all together now—never been to round four in Paris or Wimbledon. Osaka has 25 weeks at No.1. Barty retired on her 114th week atop the charts. Barty had more doubles success. The head-to-head doesn’t give us much, But you know what does? Prize money, often a sneaky-good barometer of success. Barty retired just shy of $25 million, $4.4 million coming from one event, the 2019 Shenzhen year-ender. Osaka? After last week’s success, she’s around $21 million.
I don't agree with any of Margaret Court's views, and thankfully most of today's society doesn't either, but I don't agree with taking her name off that stadium that she earned with her surpassing tennis excellence. She's both super religious, and we know most religions of all faiths are sadly homophobic, and a product of her time, but she hasn't committed any moral or legal crime to make stripping her name off the stadium necessary in my view, and she's entitled to express her views whether I agree with them or not.
—Franklyn
• Fair and reasonable. Part of this is a tired discussion about cancel culture and free speech and shelter from consequences. But to me the more interesting discussion is about whether there’s a membrane between performance and the person, the art and the artist. Can we appreciate Michael Jackson and Woody Allen and divorce the creative output from the person. In this case? This is the distinction that Tennis Australia has (cynically, I would contend) tried to make. Margaret Court’s name doesn’t adorn the arena simply because of her Wikipedia achievements. Clearly—like Billie Jean King and Arthur Ashe in New York and, for that matter, Roland Garros in Paris—she is honored for a sort of totality of what she achieved and also what she represents. When she keeps up this relentless streak of bigotry and homophobia (“LGBT … it’s the devil, it’s not of God.”) she is not fit for public honors. That her views are so deeply offensive and hurtful to many other tennis champions—and so wildly inconsistent with the WTA’s avowed values—it makes sense they would say, “Look Margret, your tennis achievements were tremendous. As the Jazz Comedian and 'Carwash' scene-stealer Franklyn Ajaye says, we recognize your views are genuine and are based in faith. But we can’t abide by honoring you at our facility. Just can’t do it.”
Jon, Nick Kyrgios…again? I used to enjoy his rebellious showmanship, but now his schtick is getting old.
—Kelly G. Louisville, KY
• When Kyrgios had the Miami tantrum he was the oldest player remaining in the draw. Sinner, age 20, looked like a player from a totally different generation. And an older one.
What’s going on in Miami? Bummer of a day so far for Stadium court ticket holders. Good day to watch some doubles, though!
—Helen of D.C.
• This was obviously sent last Wednesday as multiple matches ended prematurely. It gives me a chance to quote Kamakshi Tandon, who quipped, “Ash Barty might have retired, but that doesn't mean every player in the Miami field has to do it.” We all know the rules and the fine print. But surely there’s a creative way to make fans whole who pay for two matches and get two retirements.
Shots
• Colette Lewis has your Easter Bowl results:
http://tenniskalamazoo.blogspot.com/2022/04/blokhina-and-michelsen-take-different.html
• “Hey Jon: With the WTA Tour coming to Charleston this week and so much more attention being paid to the legacy of Althea Gibson, I know your readers would be interested that her autobiography “I Always Wanted To Be Somebody” has been re-released and available for sale for $19.95, where before it was only available on places like Ebay for like $800. The link to get the book on Amazon is here.
More Tennis Coverage:
