Tennis Mailbag: Press Conference Censorship, Frances Tiafoe’s Trajectory and More

Submissions have been lightly edited for brevity and clarity.

Hey, everyone …

• Here’s this week’s Served podcast:

• Nontennis news, here’s a heartbreaking story for CBS Sports: Owen Pitts loved basketball.

To put it simply, Owen Pitts loved basketball.

After being faced with a terminal diagnosis, he and his family faced it with grace, buoyed by a community that rallied to show its love.

With a dream of playing basketball, the varsity team at Medical Lakes High School helped him. pic.twitter.com/v5FGQlmlVI
— CBS Sports (@CBSSports) February 18, 2026

• This week’s unsolicited book recommendation: Kings and Pawns by Howard Bryant.

Onward …

Let’s start with a topic that is still getting a lot of play, especially on social media. It pertains to athletes being asked politically charged questions. This was a story at the Australian Open and has been a topic of discussion at the Winter Olympics. Coco Gauff weighed in from Dubai.

Then came this account from the Rotterdam ATP event, alleging that the tournament was (shamefully, self-defeatingly, censoriously) restricting interview questions to “match-only.”

A quick riff. I will always take the side of an independent media. I will always oppose censorship. So bear that in mind. But I would submit the system works fine as is. Athletes are public figures. They seek an audience beyond sports. They often like to engage in topics beyond sports. They are smart, self-sufficient adults with agency and free will, able to steer conversations where they like. Some athletes (understandably) resist political or tendentious topics. Other athletes, such as Gauff, (understandably) happily engage with these topics. (Tangent: After the Russian invasion of her country, I had a session with Elina Svitolina and I was specifically requested to include at least one question about Ukraine.)

Would I ask—in a press conference setting, ambush-style, not knowing the athletes’ predilections—about their opinions on representing the U.S. amid uproar following the fatal shootings of Renee Good and Alex Pretti by federal agents in Minnesota? I would not. Is it a valid story topic? Sure. But there are ways to poll athletes without putting them on the spot. Pull the athlete aside and ask if they want to weigh in. Text the tour or the player’s agent and explain your idea. The post-match press conference is … a choice.

But fundamentally, this is an exercise in free speech, on all sides. Let the journalist ask the question. Let the athlete respond with a no comment or a that was a clown question, bro. Let social media weigh in. Let an editor decide if the resultant story is worthy of publication. Let the public decide whether they want to hear athletes weighing in on politics.

It’s not perfect, but it beats the alternative. Censorship never wins. And someone should tell that to a hypocrisy-drenched tournament in the Netherlands, sponsored by a bank, seeking a wider audience … and allegedly asking the media and players for “tennis only” questions.

Hi Jon, What do you make of [Destanee Aiava]’s retirement statement? Especially the comments attached. It’s a stain on the tennis community that they’ve made her feel this way and I wish we could have all treated her better.

Zach

• For those who missed it:

It’s not your conventional retirement announcement.

I don’t know Destanee Aiava. As you say, it’s unfortunate that she’s had this experience. I’d like to know more and hear more specifics about the racism, homophobia and misogyny she experienced. One of you cited the current success of players of color as pushback against her claim that the sport is racist. I don’t think she forfeits her claims because Serena Williams won 23 majors, Coco Gauff is a star or Victoria Mboko is a top-10 player. I also don’t think you can level such serious blanket charges and, absent specifics, leave it at that.

Aiava has had some injury challenges throughout her career and was open about her mental health challenges. May she find happiness and fulfillment in this next phase of life.

Few Observations from the AO:

1. Novak [Djokovic] is the GOAT—everyone can chill and get over it. It’s kinda sad that it has to be explained to an American audience what he does well … while he’s mentoring so many top youngsters and the next generation of top players. He’s the most balanced player ever, almost every facet of his game is technically one of the top five ever (except overhead hahaha), and he’s the master of challenging your strike zone and finding your technical and mental weaknesses … Once he does, you’re done.

2. [John] McEnroe’s commentary gets more and more … for lack [of a better] term … unhelpful. He still has the old “hit, rush net, win point” mindset. Has he not seen a Novak, [Rafael] Nadal, [Carlos Alcaraz], [Jannik] Sinner, [Daniil Medvedev] passing shot? These guys could have been champions in different sports, they chose tennis. That’s how amazing the athleticism is these days.

3. [Ben] Shelton STILL needs a serve coach! The drop off in speed and accuracy when he's not slam dunking the ball is jarring.

4. How hard is Sinner kicking himself for underestimating Novak with Fresh legs? For another year or so at least no one should do that!

Cheers! Vijay

1. I had to check the timestamp of your note. Has anyone since, say, 2023 really debated this point? That Djokovic is still reaching finals and beating defending champions at 38 years old is only the latest in his lengthy bill of particulars. He’s the GOAT on the men’s side. Case closed.

2. I premise this by saying that, on balance, I’m team John. We need to think of McEnroe the way we think of Charles Barkley. There is an entire segment premised on Barkley’s lack of contemporary NBA knowledge (“Who He Play For?”). But it’s offset by entertainment, experience, comfort and lack of a tongue. Think of John that way. He’s not going deep on Gabriel Diallo or Linda Noskova’s X’s and O’s, recent matches and backstories. But he’s the inimitable John McEnroe.

3. Does Shelton need a new serve coach, or just a different risk threshold/tolerance?

4. Reaching a major semifinal and losing to the GOAT is hardly a crisis. But this was definitely a regression for Sinner. He won the Australian Open two years in a row and beat Alcaraz in their previous meeting. Alcatraz abruptly parted ways with his coach ahead of the event, and Sinner’s bid to three-peat looked promising. Then he got lucky, nearly being upset in the middle weekend after his legs turned to tiramisu before the heat index hit the threshold for roof closure, mercifully. In the semifinals, he played a 38-year-old and basically got outfought. And his rival (who’s younger) won the title, moving ahead of him in majors, 7–4. Again, it wasn’t a catastrophe, but not the January he would have ordered up.

Frances Tiafoe fell to Sebastian Korda at the Dallas Open. | Mike Frey-Imagn Images

I saw Frances Tiafoe just lost in Dallas. What is going on with him? Time to sell that stock?

JT. Brooklyn

• I preface this by saying it’s not personal. Tiafoe is the Pat Rafter/Kim Clijsters/Gustavo Kuerten/Jessica Pegula of this generation. If you have a problem with them, look inward. Here we have a fun, light, collegial presence. Tiafoe is great with colleagues, fans and the media. He’s charitable, funny and sunny. “Great guy” is such an overused shorthand, but it applies perfectly here.

But—and I’m sure I’ve either written or said this before—I think we can tend to conflate Tiafoe’s likability with his tennis. His tennis is uneven, tending to peak at majors and sag throughout the year. There are lapses in concentration and tactics.

There’s a running joke about the mess Tiafoe leaves on the court. His side of the chair looks like the floor of a sophomore’s dorm room, with flung towels, discarded bottles and shoes with untied shoelaces. It’s funny. But I wonder if it isn’t a tell, too. There can be something disorganized about his game. As one of his former coaches once told me, “I love him; things need to be tightened up a bit.”

Scattered asides:

A) I wonder if we haven’t mischaracterized him a bit. Maybe he’s overachieved, not underachieved. There’s his unlikely backstory. The hitch in the forehand. The volleys that can break down under pressure. The unique set of external pressures. He has overcome a lot to get to where he is. That he has cracked the top 10 and been a steady presence in main draws, never losing his amiable mode of being? That’s a win.

B) Players talk about peaking for majors, which makes sense. But you can overdo it. It’s hard to take on bad loss after bad loss and then rock up to a best-of-five tentpole tournament lacking in wins (and aura) and assume you’ll be there in Week 2 simply because you get up for the biggest events.

C) I took it as a positive sign that Tiafoe decided to make a coaching change and work with Dr. Mark Kovacs, a renowned sports scientist who cuts a very different figure from conventional coaches. This signified not merely a willingness to make a change but a willingness to reassess an entire approach.

D) His results have been rough in 2026. But, happily for Tiafoe, it’s early in the year. Plus, he’s still only middle-aged in tennis years. And Lululemon paid for that endorsement deal, so he is free of financial pressure. You could press Tiafoe and say, Buckle down, time is ticking as the reader implies. You could also try to reduce pressure and tell him, Relax: You already won. Now you’re playing with house money.

Marin Čilić, is he a Hall of Famer?

@Chrishammer

• This follows the usual heuristic. Are we being faithful to Hall of Fame precedent? Or are we talking about an all-time great, as halls of fame are designed to do?

If it’s the former, he’s in. (I would vote for Čilić if he were on the ballot today.) He has a major title and two finals appearances, all during the Big Three era. He also has more than 600 match wins (for comparison, Dominic Thiem retired with 348). Čilić has had a long career and enjoyed success on all surfaces. Aside from a nebulous doping suspension in 2013, he maxes out on good-for-the-sport points. There are certainly enshrined players with lesser qualifications.

If (when?) the Hall of Fame wanted to tighten the screws and break with precedent? Čilić is a tougher candidate to support. One major? A career-high ranking of No. 3? A 3–37 record vs. the Big Three? It’s no doubt an awesome career. But is that Hall of Fame worthy?

I can’t understand why Coco [Gauff] gets all this sympathy when she objects to cameras showing her smashing her racket. Then you noted the WTA response supporting her. Where was this when [Aryna] Sabalenka smashed a racket after the 2023 U.S. Open and it was shown on camera? I guess you have to be a “golden girl” to get sympathy from the woke media.

Anonymous.

• I take issue with so much of this.

A) Does the media have its flaws? Sure. Many, in fact. Is coverage of tennis—or any sector—perfect? Hardly. But a little more critical analysis, rather than the blame-the-media lazy fallback, would be great.

B) As much as this was a bigger issue at the 2026 Australian Open than the 2023 U.S. Open, it’s less about a difference in sympathies than a difference in timing. Gauff’s incident came mid-tournament (so there were other players to ask, etc.), not after the final, as was the case with Sabalenka.

C) Had Sabalenka complained in the hours after, as Gauff had, it would have been an issue. Here’s Sabalenka’s press conference from that day.

You’ll notice not a word about cameras catching her smashing her racket. If she had made a stink—as she would have been in her rights to do—I suspect she would have found just as much support. Especially if, the following day, an army of other players supported her. (As was the case with Gauff.)

As long as we are here, here goes nothing: social media is made for tennis and vice versa. A global sport arrayed across time zones, punctuated by fashion, characters, memes, inside jokes, split opinions and clippable bits from press conferences. I’ve heard from and met so many of you via DM, have gotten tips, learned about new players, etc. Walk around the players’ lounge, and virtually everyone is scrolling.

So the trolls and incivility hit differently in tennis. Agree or disagree. Love Djokovic or hate Djokovic. Root against Naomi Osaka or not. Even float a ridiculous conspiracy theory. Whatever. But at the risk of sounding naive, can we agree to keep it civil? When you use racist tropes, make ad hominem attacks or even veiled threats, you’re not just trolling; you’re sullying an entire community—sermon over.

I sometimes make the mistake of engaging trolls and say a version of this: You are free to say whatever you like on this platform. That’s free speech. But why choose to be the obnoxious boor at the bar? It’s your right. But why make that choice?

Shots

Glenn Fuller, read us out:

I enjoy reading the Mailbag each week and listening to you and Andy on Served.

I wanted to follow up on your answer to the person seeking a new U.S. tournament destination. In terms of enjoyment and aesthetics, I agree with your choice of Indian Wells. I alternate yearly visits to IW & the Miami Open. For 2026 I was due to attend IW. I started to make arrangements in early December by purchasing tickets to the first Friday and Saturday in order to catch the seeded players. When I looked at the Saturday day session tickets, I was startled to see prices STARTING in the $240+ range. This is probably in the same range as second-round tickets at the U.S. Open for, subjectively, a lesser non-major product. I simply couldn’t justify spending that much for one session, so I ended up pivoting to a Miami Open trip. I purchased tickets for three second round day sessions for about the same cost at the IW equivalent.

Perhaps early December was too late to buy IW tickets that had been on sale for several weeks. It seems that Indian Wells has also fallen to the forces of dynamic pricing and resale tickets. While the Miami Open doesn’t have the same level of aesthetics as IW [BTW, I don't see how Hard Rock Stadium is that much worse than Arthur Ashe Stadium given both are cavernous], I still find the Miami Open a good tournament experience. The Miami vibe is more energetic than Indian Wells IMO.

I hope you will take this into consideration and further comment in a future Mailbag. Thank you for your consideration. Cheers!

HAVE A GOOD WEEK, EVERYONE!

Shots

More Tennis on Sports Illustrated