Lawsuits and Blisters

Rennae and Caitlin attempt to break down the well-intentioned? Ill-intentioned? obvious yet nonsensical? PTPA lawsuit filed against both tours as well as clear up the rules about acute injuries, discuss the Raducanussaince and give some deserved guff to the tournament organizers.

See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Episode Transcript

Speaker 1 (00:14):
Hi, and welcome to the Renee Stubs Tennis podcast. I
am Renee Stubs. We are in New York City. I
am joined by the one and only Caitlin Thompson. Petko
is still down in Miami commentator doing a great job.
I did like listening to her dosal tones last night.

Speaker 2 (00:31):
What's a match if you're going? Last time?

Speaker 1 (00:33):
She was calling the Eagerson Tech match last night, So
there you go. She's been working all week. I saw
her down there when I was down there for a
brief moment. I'm back. But anyway, we've got a lot, Caitlin,
a lot to talk about. I'm always interested because when
you pop into my apartment, you always like, ooh, We've
got a lot to talk about today, And I'm always
getting pretty excited about that.

Speaker 2 (00:52):
It's a great one because you know, as much as
I like talking about match play and technique, which a
listener was pointing out to me over the weekend, that
not a lot of the shows in the podcast universe
like actually have conversations about technique and and I know
that that's shocking, but also I forget what a resource
are no problem, it's it's I forget that not everybody

(01:15):
has that. I forget. I don't forget that you and
especially you know with your coaching hat on, but also Andrea,
like have such an intimate understanding of the mechanics of tennis.
But I guess I it went. It doesn't go without
saying that that's a new unique selling point for the show.

Speaker 1 (01:31):
Oh what did they say?

Speaker 2 (01:32):
They were like nobody, They were like, oh other shows.

Speaker 1 (01:36):
Who is this person? Should we give them a little
love or do you not want to give them?

Speaker 2 (01:39):
It's my friend Peter Klegg from the UK. He's a
devout listener. Hello Pita, and you know he always has
lots of opinions. He and I were texting a lot
about the Ratti Kanu sense that's happening because we are
both big big Emma Roti Kanu fans. I'm just trying
to push the Ratti Kanu agenda on this podcast and
now maybe for good reason, but you know.

Speaker 1 (01:58):
We're still all now that Pete is English.

Speaker 2 (02:00):
Yes, Peter is undoubtedly English, but he also has a
lot of very strong opinions and well formed ones. You
know from years of tennis spectating, his own rackets pross
background and also you know, watching and loving tennis the
way we do so anyway, it's such a good selling point,
but I don't have that much to contribute those conversations
as much as I, you know, enjoy listening to them.

(02:21):
This is where I really shane, which is like critiquing
governmental structures and getting it more. Do you want to
tell people why sticky wicked of it all?

Speaker 1 (02:29):
Like, clearly I can talk tennis until my face turns
blue as pet Co and I.

Speaker 2 (02:34):
Can, which is great, But you know, I.

Speaker 1 (02:37):
Don't have a journalist's background. I don't have a journal
journalist degree. I am a professional and was a professional
tennis player, and so that is my expertise. And you know,
although people like to tell me on the old social
media's shut up and stick to tennis, I tell them
to go f off because I'm also allowed to have
an opinion, and you sure do. And it really that

(03:00):
The thing that really irks me about when people say
that like stick to sports, you know they tell athletes
that all the time, is that the intersection of between politics,
worldviews and sports is always and always has been a
part of the world. Look at the Munich Olympics. I mean, hello,
I mean the list is endless.

Speaker 2 (03:19):
Look look at the Olympics with you know, a country intercision. Uh,
you know Jesse Owens winning a sprint race. Look at
the Mexico City Olympics. Look at yeah, I mean.

Speaker 1 (03:30):
Look at the Australian Open. Look at We've had demonstrations,
you've had There's been a lot of things. So for
people to say that, I mean, and also, I'm a human,
I'm a I'm a human being. You also a tax
payer in America. In America, I have an American passport.
I am a dual citizen, so I get to say
what I want as a as a tax paying human being.

(03:51):
And so you know, just that, just that, Rather.

Speaker 2 (03:55):
Do you do this to yourself because I did breed
and ground for I know, I can't know myself.

Speaker 1 (04:00):
That's a tennis player. It is. I like to hit
the ball back and forth. But the whole point in
me telling you this is asking the questions of because
what is your background? Yeah, to be able to have
this nuanced conversation we can have.

Speaker 2 (04:11):
I mean, yes, reportage, newspaper and magazine journalism. I like
the things that I find interesting generally as a person
are narratives, which is why I like talking a little
bit more about you know some of the player narratives
or some of the tournament narratives, and obviously because I
used to be a political reporter, the organizational and infrastructural

(04:34):
components of this sport are fascinating to me because of
their I would say success in spite of dysfunction. I
don't mind dysfunction. I understand it decently well, both on
a personal and professional level. But I also think what's
amazing about tennis and one thing that we keep coming
back to and where our shared love obviously is like

(04:55):
really expressed, is this sport is amazing, And from a
product perspective, meaning like watching professional tennis, the level of
professional tennis and now increasingly the interest and engagement around
recreational tennis has not been better in probably my lifetime,
but the structure around it has never been more clearly dysfunctional.

(05:17):
Whether it has always been functionally this bad or not
is irrelevant. But it's the clarity of which one thing
is really great and it's being held back by this
other thing that's not so great actually gives me a
lot of optimism because it's not again coming from a
place of complaint. It's just like, oh man, it's already
doing pretty well. Imagine how well it could be doing
if we had one governing body, if we had one
uniform policy, if we had you know, et cetera. So

(05:38):
this like allows me to get back to like my
favorite hobby horse, which is like the description of an
ideal you know.

Speaker 1 (05:44):
Organizational structure, professional tennis.

Speaker 2 (05:46):
Well, you know, much like what inspired me to cover
politics for so long was not to talk about who
was winning each debate, or each polling cycle, or each
state in early you know caucusing and early voting, but
rather like who is addressing the themes of the America
in saki right now? What is this giving us a
chance to talk about and creating our own iodeal world,
which you know, just better a fracture political landscape. Most

(06:07):
of us can agree that people should have healthcare, education,
you know, things like that, and so it allows me
to kind of thematically get at things that are really
like with the altitude in which I like it, which
is like from upon high.

Speaker 1 (06:18):
Okay, So you know, one of the reasons we're bringing
this up, of course, is just this entire PTPA lawsuit
with the atp WTA, etc. I Mean, they're going after everybody.

Speaker 2 (06:30):
ATA and if which setting the Slams aside. That's everybody.

Speaker 1 (06:36):
Yeah, that's everybody they don't want to touch, which is
interesting to me. So I want you to get into
the nuances more because you've really researched this a little bit,
maybe even more than me. But the bottom line is,
I think the thing that cracks me up in this
is that really the entities to go after more from
the player standpoint as far as getting money more money

(06:57):
is the Grand Slams. The Grand Slams are the ones
that are really taking advantage of the players. They're the
ones that have, without a doubt, you know, with the
revenue share, are without question not giving the players enough. Now,
if you think about it, I'm going to talk about
it in Layman's terms here, like basically, the winner of
the of a Grand Slam is getting somewhere between three

(07:19):
million and crow million dollars four brillion.

Speaker 2 (07:22):
Yeah, So, which is a nice sense check until you
learn it's a great tournament.

Speaker 1 (07:26):
Is it's a great check. But when you're talking about
the best players in the world playing seven matches, okay,
seven matches over two more than two weeks. Now every
Grand Slam is going to fifteen days, it's like, if
you think about a Novak Djokovic, Let's say back in
the day, Roger Federer, Serena, you know, the all time greats,

(07:48):
if they played seven nights of exhibitions, they would be
making at least seven million dollars. They're getting paid a
million dollars an exhibition if they go to South America,
if they go to Mexico, if if they go to
South Africa, if they go to Australia, if they go
they are getting paid a million dollars to go and
play an exhibition. So my whole thing is you when
you think about that for a two week event, the

(08:10):
time that they're giving out, the money that those Grand
Slams are making, that is not enough money.

Speaker 2 (08:13):
For them the way that I would put it, not
to correct you, because I think that's absolutely correct. You're
talking about what the market will bear in what they
could get on the open market. I don't know that
that is going to elicit a lot of understanding or
sympathy because I hear that and I still think, oh, okay,
So they're getting six hundred thousand dollars per match, Like
that's more than most Americans will earn in the next decade.
The better way to understand it is Wimbledon makes a

(08:38):
little under five hundred million dollars a year. Wimbledon is
paying out let's call it, twenty thirty million for all
the events, maybe a little more. That's the that's the issue.
It's less than ten percent of what they're earning. Yeah, granted,
Wimbledon spends a lot on marketing, Wimbledon spends a lot
of an expansion, Wimbledon spends a lot on hospitality. There's
a whole literal city that is dedicated to making this

(08:59):
specifically the biggest earning Grand Slam. But from a proportion perspective,
if you look at any other league or any other sport,
the amount that the ownership group versus the amount that
the labor group, which is in this case the players
get is proportionally much much closer. So that is actually
really the issue. It's a proportion deal. They're earning so
much more than the players in so many fantastic ways,

(09:20):
and they're not sharing it really with the players. So
it's not to your exact correct point, it's not exactly
the tours.

Speaker 1 (09:26):
That are.

Speaker 2 (09:28):
Responsible for a lot of the issues that the players face.
That said, to bring everybody back the PTPA, which is
the non governmental non union but players sort of advocacy
group started by Novak Djokovic. Vasikpaspacil was an early supporter
of it, and some other players through the years have
sort of gotten onto it. Has now sued wtaatp IATA

(09:49):
and IF and they've sued them for a number of
different things, non competition, they've sued them for dangerous working conditions.
They've sued them for a lack of transparency when a
the deal making and you know, at first blush, you
were like, okay, well, this makes sense that they are advocating,
which is what they're meant to do for the players

(10:09):
to have a better outcome on the tour. These players
play eleven months a year. They're not let in on
the negotiating tail when it comes to salaries, and they
don't have full discretion over the way that they're allowed
to sort of conduct business, especially as freelancers, which is
essentially what they are. So we can go into like
the nuts and bolts of the lawsuit in reading about it. However,

(10:34):
the actual nuts and bolts of what they're suing over
is yes, So on one hand, and again we'll unpack
some of the stuff individually, But is it right to

(10:56):
go after the tours? Sure, you could argue that they
haven't done a good enough job marketing in the sport.
They certainly haven't done a good enough job protecting the players,
advocating for them, making sure that the season doesn't injure
them and go on too long. What they actually filed
in court is bizarre. It doesn't really actually make any sense,
and it contradicts itself because in one hand it will

(11:17):
say that there's you know, sort of no competition. On
the other hand, it will say that they are allowed
to play an exhibition. So which one is it? Like
the fact that and I'm sort of glassing high level
over this, but like the fact that Novak Djokovic, who
himself started the PTPA and has been a very vocal
and contributed to his own money and has obviously been

(11:38):
a very vocal advocate advocate of what the pgpa's mission is,
is not himself a plaintiff in the lawsuit.

Speaker 1 (11:44):
Ye, it's here that's a complete strategy on his standpoint
that he doesn't want to muddy the waters again. But
also at the same time, I'm saying that completely as like,
you know, as somebody asking a layman question, but also
at the same time that looks terrible.

Speaker 2 (12:00):
It's not a great look. And if you're gonna have
players involved.

Speaker 1 (12:05):
You better have the greatest of all time a part
of your list.

Speaker 2 (12:08):
Yeah, like the fact that Carlos Alkaaz, which I'm not
saying Carlos Aclaraz is the greatest of all time, but like,
certainly in terms of like public opinion and dynamism.

Speaker 1 (12:15):
Well, in the next ten to fifteen years of the tour,
it's gonna be Alcoraz and Cinna presumably.

Speaker 2 (12:20):
You know. The slice of players that are putting their
name on this thing is pretty small, and it's pretty specific,
like and it kind of all feels like there it's
fueled by personal grievances like Nicole melcar Martinez, great doubles player.
I understand she's been shafted by like, you know, selection
committees for team competitions because they don't value doubles players sometimes,
but like that's bullshit. It's also like, is this a

(12:43):
personal grievance against the tours or is this like part
of a larger strategic Like is is Sarana Cirstea the
voice of a nation? Like we all love Obelka because
he's a you know, antagonist, and he's a yeah, he
likes to be contrarian. Nik Kiria is like, what, I
don't know that I would want to watch a tour
up with these players, much less support their last suit
against the other. It's like, oh, man, you see somebody

(13:04):
taking a wide open shot, but it's like totally the
wrong shot. You're like, no, somebody should suit the yes, tennis, yes,
but for this in this way, when you.

Speaker 1 (13:11):
Have a shot, when you it'd be like saying, who
are you going to have make that free throw for
you in the biggest of competitions. Is it going to
be Shaquille O'Neill, sure or Michael Jordan? Right? Yeah, you know,
I'm pretty sure I know who I'm having to take
that foul shot. So I think the whole point, you know,
in this, Caitlin, is you're saying that, Okay, sure, you're

(13:32):
trying to make a difference. You're trying to make quote
unquote more money for the players, which is all good
and well, but you cannot make it in the way
that you're doing because you don't have the support of
the right people. Be the people that you have on
this on this complaint are either retired or not playing
at a high level, or have had incidences in the

(13:55):
past that have not voted too well in the public opinion.
A lot of these guys are also anti.

Speaker 2 (14:00):
Vaxxies, undermined their credibility in a way. Yeah, if you
get the most popular, well liked diplomatic players on tour
to all of a sudden say like, hey, we are
all united in this. This is something that needs to change.

Speaker 1 (14:10):
So yu Wanda, why right.

Speaker 2 (14:13):
It's not a great look. And I don't that's even
setting Novaka side. It's just you know, in the years
that now the PTPA has been functional, you know, we've
seen some photo shoots, We've seen them have some parties,
they've released some interesting stats complaining about the tennis ecosystem,
and it's hard to disagree, like, yes, the season's too long, Yes,
profit sharing should be better, Yes, you know, there should

(14:35):
be transparency, if you know. One of the interesting tidbits
that I learned from the lawsuit was a very credible
claim that the PTPA is making that Larry Ellison wanted
to personally increase prize money at the tournament. He owns
Indian Wells and was forbidden to doing so because of
the tours mandatory sort of paying tiers, which like I
can actually see sort of both sides of that. But
what an interesting turn of events that, like, you know,

(14:56):
they're some could call that artificially decreasing prices. Some might
argue like, no, there's like a labor standard for pay tiers,
much like you would have in government or like you know,
a c suite where it's like, no, you actually can't
exceed this. Otherwise it creates you know, disparate in the field,
and nobody's going to ever go to Cincinnati again. So
like part of it is is then.

Speaker 1 (15:14):
It's just a big fight between the billionaires.

Speaker 2 (15:17):
Exactly, which you know we're probably heading that way.

Speaker 1 (15:20):
I mean, yeah, there are positives and negatives towards it.
I mean, when you've got a Bennavara, when you've got
you know, these types of you know, Larry Elson's the
Aria manuals now trying to get in the mix of things.
When you've got guys like this, you are inflating and
helping in some way players make more money.

Speaker 2 (15:41):
You're also distorting the market in a way that I
think the market.

Speaker 1 (15:45):
Is unsustainable for other tournaments.

Speaker 2 (15:47):
And is unsustainable maybe for the tours, but I think
all of this indicates like a change is coming. There
was some really interesting reporting. I want to shout out
Matthew Fetterman from The New York Times, who has essentially
been like a scoop machine. This is probably the only
like real workingjournalist in the media center who is just
inside the And we have been critical in the both
of The New York Times and also of some of

(16:08):
the reportage that has come out of it. But for me,
it's like this guy is consistently breaking news. Not only
did he have the inside scoop on a lot of
the PTA, TPA, sut but he exclusively reported that during
like days after the the tours themselves, the ATP and
WTA sent another notice to the Grand Slams asking them
to come to the negotiating table because it's so clear

(16:31):
that that is a dysfunctional relationship that doesn't really that
doesn't really benefit at the great detriment of both fans
and players, and so part of me just kind of wonders, like,
you know, and then that speaks to the lawsuit. Is
John Worth I pointed out in his latest column, like
how can the tours both be a cartel, meaning like
they have unilateral monopolistic control, but yet they're trying to

(16:51):
get the ws Slams for Slams to actually like come
to the negotiating table and talk to them, So like
why did the PTA right, why didn't the PTPA? And
also if it's a.

Speaker 1 (17:02):
Cartel, WTNA to pain getting the Grand Slams to the.

Speaker 2 (17:05):
Title or there's so many permutations of this, like why
didn't the PTAPA sue the Slams? Why didn't why didn't
the PTPA get a better body of players frankly and
make a more coherent lawsuit and go after you know,
the actual power bodies of the sport, which is pretty
clear it's not the tours, you know. And the other

(17:25):
thing that I think about the tours, which is actually
why I kind of think maybe they shouldn't exist, is
they are so first of all, they don't have their
own audiences. What the what the slams have done a
great job, and why they would argue that they don't
deserve to share the profits profits with the players in
a real meaningful way is because they're the ones who
have all the audience. They're the ones who have all

(17:46):
the following They're the ones who have all the value.

Speaker 1 (17:49):
If I'm a master to say, oh, I'm going to
go to Madrid, they say, I'm gone. Where would you go?

Speaker 2 (17:53):
Rumbolton And now increasingly the other tournaments are trying to
now make up for lost time because they realized that
the Slams have kind of monopolized the imagination and also
certainly the media rates. You know, ESPN's not bidding after
going in a bidding word against Rome, as good of
a tournament, as prestigious as a tournament as a Cincinnati
Madera or Cincinnati Toruno.

Speaker 1 (18:13):
They gave up Indian Wells.

Speaker 2 (18:15):
Right because they realize, like, oh, actually, the center of
gravity for this sport. I would argue to its detriment,
but it certainly is true lies with the Slams. And
so I think I am hearing that.

Speaker 1 (18:29):
TNT Warner might be pursuing a little bit more than
what they just have now with the French Open. So
that would be certainly helpful because we all know that
again one of the reasons why the Grand Slams hold
so much power is yes, they have captured the audience,
They have captured the imagination of tennis fans, they know
about the Australian Open, it's a trip to go to.
They know about the US Open, they know about Wimbledon

(18:50):
and about the French Open. Is that money that they
have is because of the television rights from the ESPR,
from TNT, from Channel nine and Australia like so a
lot of the money that's that the Grand Slams are
making is from television rights. So that that is one
thing that has kind of hurt is that yes, it's
on tennis channel. Every event is basically on tennis channel,

(19:13):
but is that a big enough audience And you would
argue that it's probably not. And that's why also the
to US aren't reaping the benefits of the money coming
in from television rights because it's on it's on a
cable network that not a lot of people want to
that either get or pay for, and including people in
Europe and people in Australia. Got people and how do
I watch tennis? And they have no idea. So that's

(19:33):
part of as well, and that's something that the tours
I think could work on, whether it be with YouTube
or whoever, to be able to get it on and
I know it's through YouTube with tennis channel as on
there as well if you pay for it. But still
it's it's it's it's hard to get an audience that
are watching terms.

Speaker 2 (19:48):
If I'm a rates tall there, if I'm a if
I'm a rates buyer, and I say I want to
broadcast tennis, what are what are my options? What are
my options? And I either go out and buy the
four biggest audiences which are attached to the Slams, or
I try to cobble together a rights negotiation with a
bunch of different fiefdoms. And it's the same problem it is

(20:10):
in all ways, right, Like you know, nobody's buying the
Rome merch, but people are buying the Roland Garls merch.
There's no equity, and you know it's I went to
the WTA event in Indian miles, you went to the
one in Miami. The try it's really you know, then
a direct in their new commercial the reband is very cool.
But also I wonder, like what where is the equity
in the WTA? What do they actually own? They own

(20:34):
one tournament at the end of the year finals, What
is the actual equity in the agency? What do they
own that's their own thing?

Speaker 1 (20:42):
Well, they own the weeks on the tours.

Speaker 2 (20:44):
And they own, you know, the right to represent the
players at the moment, and they own their tour ending finals,
and in the case of ATP, they own you know,
the next gen finals and JEDTA and the ATP finals.

Speaker 1 (20:56):
That has been intro and the same with the IP.
So you know, it is a question of the PTPA
if they really want to make a difference, they have
to garner more support from the from the larger ATP
and WTA players first of all, for sure, that's for
the number one thing. If you don't have the players support,
if you don't know, if you don't have a Jack
Draper who gets asked this question, he goes, I don't

(21:17):
have any idea what they do. I don't know what
you're talking about. La la la la la. I mean
he was just like even Novak.

Speaker 2 (21:22):
Djokovic's like, hey, why's your name on the lawsuit of
the group that you started? And he was like, I
don't agree with everything that's in the lastsuit.

Speaker 1 (21:28):
Yeah, So it's like, if you're going to go and
do this lawsuit, I think that, Look, I think there's
an opportunity here, a big opportunity here. You think about
like for example, what Live Golf did right, what Greg
Norman did, Greg a lot of shit right. And he's
been a bit of a lightning bowl, lightning rod with
the PGA. He fought against the PGA for a long time.

(21:49):
He felt like there was a little bit of the
same of what's happening now that they were taking advantage
of the players and they weren't paying them enough, YadA YadA, YadA,
all the things right. So he sort of saw an
opportunity with theis with the Saudi money clearly to have
a rival tour, and he went out and took a
lot of bows and arrows and he got that done. Now,

(22:10):
is it whitewashing sports in a way? In golf, the
one of the biggest sports in the world. Absolutely, they
went and got the Saudi money, they put a rival
to her on and they got hundreds of They got
many many players from the PGA tour, some of the
biggest ones in the world to go and play that
and get paid one hundred and two hundred million dollars
to go and do it. So of course players are

(22:31):
going to go and sign that deal and go and
do it because they now have generational wealth for their family,
forever and ever and ever. Now you can say, well
that was shitty, the Rory McElroy's and Tiger Woods going out,
I'm not going to the Saudias. Well sorry, you guys,
you have hundreds and hundreds of millions of dollars in
the bank. Some of these other golfers that maybe saw
an opportunity to have fifty million dollars in the bank,

(22:51):
knowing that they were never going to have that type
of money. Of course they're going to jump ship. So
there was an opportunity there. And now all of a sudden,
you see two years later guests who's getting in bed
to other live and the PGA tour. So, you know,
whatever you want to say about Greg in that situation,
he managed to figure out a way to get these
tours to actually talk to each other. Now he's been

(23:12):
pushed out, and Rory and Tiger and another guys like
you know, we're the men. Now we've got well not really.
What you have to have is you have to have
somebody come in and maybe make a big difference. But
the people at the PTPA and the people leading them
are not the people to do that, and they're not
doing a good job because this is a perfect example
of as you said, when you walked in and he's like,
I like the idea, but what the fuck is not

(23:34):
a good strategy?

Speaker 2 (23:35):
Doesn't seem hard. First of all, suing anybody in any
contact is super easy. Failing a lawsuit is sadly very easy,
super common. Yeah, and because the barrier to entry is
super low, you don't even have to country, especially in America,
which is where this last suit has been failed in
the years of their existence. Getting not only more players,

(23:59):
as you say, which is what Greg Norman did, which
is getting the popular.

Speaker 1 (24:03):
He got a lot of really big players.

Speaker 2 (24:04):
And at the end of the day, it doesn't matter
what you think about the players, It doesn't matter what
you think about the amount of money if you have
the will of the players, the players are the asset here.
That's the actual value.

Speaker 1 (24:17):
Of the sport.

Speaker 2 (24:18):
It's not the Wimbledon shirts and the brand and the
TV rights because if there's nothing to air, then those
TV rights are worthless. If there's no you know, player
on the on the court, you're not going to Wimbledon
to buy the shirt, right And so for me, the
players in doing this have kind of fired a gun
half cocked where it's like, Okay, you know that you

(24:40):
guys are the most valuable part, so you need to
get everyone unified, or at least a huge, huge majority
of you, and then the other thing. And I don't
think that this is particularly hard because we've had conversations
about you know, Billy jan King doing this and helping
other leagues when they've been organizing and starting. You know,
there are so many examples now, you know, one of
one of our listeners, a guy called Mark Shapiro, who

(25:02):
lives in California, was talking to me about like, hey,
if you've been following what boxing has done, they got
Saudi money. Again, however you feel about that. What they
did was they got Saudi money, They created a meaningful
amount of competitions that counted towards something else. They created
a spectacle, they marketed it, They got all the best boxers,
and now boxing has been revitalized. Boxing is a sport
I don't care about. I don't watch, I never will,

(25:23):
and all of it is not appealing to me. That said,
from a structural perspective, if you're the PTPA and you say, hey, look,
we've spent all this time getting all the players on
the same page, how do we how we put a
plan together? So we're going to actually eschew the tours.
We'll just deal right with the Grand Slams. And here's
our plan. And when you ask them, they don't really
have one. And so again, but Caitlin, what I'm missed.

Speaker 1 (25:44):
Opportunity one of the reasons for this, and I really
and I want no player to take offense to this.
But we're not the smartest. Tennis players are not super educated.
They come onto the tours at seventeen, sixteen, eighteen whatever.
They haven't gone to school, they haven't got a college.
They haven't studied finance, they haven't studied economics, they haven't

(26:07):
studied you know whatever. They need to study business acumens
at all. We're talking about tennis players that are looking
at each other going, yeah, we want this and we
want that, and they're easily led in certain ways. Well,
and I want smart conversations and people that represent the players,
that actually have the players' perspectives and have the players,

(26:30):
you know, their interests at the main heart of it.
And I think those are the people that need to
be talking about for the players, you know, not the players.
Maybe that, but the agents are a problem, Caitlin, This
is again another this is why people don't invest in
tennis because it is so muddied.

Speaker 2 (26:45):
Yeah, well, I think, just to follow up on your point,
I think maybe as educated or not as the players
are a lot of them smelled a stinker and stayed
far away from this.

Speaker 1 (26:55):
Yes, it's my point.

Speaker 2 (26:56):
The PTB has been trying very hard to recruit and
they have not.

Speaker 1 (27:01):
They have not recruited anyone.

Speaker 2 (27:02):
They have not succeeded, no, based on their names, on that, on.

Speaker 1 (27:06):
That, And that's that's the concern I have in just
in terms of everything, is that we are not talking
about people that are involved in this that either speak
really well to the to the actual problems. And the
fact that they're not even involved and haven't involved the
Grand Slams, to me is the biggest tell. Yeah.

Speaker 2 (27:24):
If I'm the Tours, I get why they send a
note to the Grand Slams. What the Tours should actually
do is say, hey, look we said we were in
a union before, but we actually are. We control labor,
negotiate with us Slams or we'll have a work stoppage.

Speaker 1 (27:37):
Yeah.

Speaker 2 (27:37):
I mean, that's how you get the players on board,
and that's how you get, you know, some movement, So
maybe that's what needs to happen. But I was hoping
the PCPA would turn out to be more real, and
I am sort of confused.

Speaker 1 (27:50):
And well, to be continued, I guess to be continued,
I mean it's going to be continued into nothing and
into oblivion. But anyway, oh listen, enough with that, enough
with the debarcle of the PTPA and ATP and WTA,
Let's get to the Miami Open, where a lot has happened.
Kate love it. I mean, can we talk about the carnage.

(28:13):
First of all, everyone that did well in Indian Wells
crapped out completely in Miami. Just done. And I can
give you two reasons for that, complete exhaustion, which is
why it is a fucking terrible idea to have back
to back tier ones. Sorry it is back to back
one thousands is a terrible idea. It also dilutes the product.
But whatever, what do I know, And especially going from

(28:36):
Indian Wells to Miami, conditions are completely different. The court
was a little faster in Miami. The balls are different.
It was Wilson balls in Innie Wells. It is dunelop
balls in Miami. You have humidity and different conditions. It
was quite cool in Miami. Actually it was like days
where they were cool, days where it was hot and
humid more so a lot more than Indian Wales. And

(28:56):
then India Wells is dry and desert conditions. So that's
why it's really hard to win the double. It's hard
to do the Sunshine Double because it is such different conditions.
I always joke about just ask Allndsay Davenport, who won
like Indian was like five or six times and could
never win Miami. And so we saw that at its
peak again at this tournament. It's really hard to go

(29:18):
back to back.

Speaker 2 (29:18):
Yeah, and I think for me too, the tapes of
players we were getting who won and went deep in
Indian Wells were some new feaces. There was a lot
of new energy. I mean, sure you had your egos,
who's used to going deep in a tournament?

Speaker 1 (29:33):
Yes, and she I think just broke a record. I
don't know what it was, Yesterda was like twenty one
or I'm sure somebody will tell me on the socials,
but it was a certain amount of consecutive quarterfinals at
W two one thousand.

Speaker 2 (29:49):
Hit now, so staggering records like that or not. Don't
get a lot of shame, but actually that that's to
me day in, weekend, week out, for sure results.

Speaker 1 (29:57):
That is somebody who turns up to every big tournament
every single time and is there to win it, and
doesn't mean she's gonna win it, but she will be
in that last section of the draw every single time
at the biggest tournaments. And that's remarkable. So it's also
one people say, oh, how can she be ranked there
and why is she one or two in the world.
It's like, because she's consistently fucking good every time and

(30:20):
it doesn't matter.

Speaker 2 (30:20):
What, regardless of conditions, regardless of regardless of service. So yeah,
I wasn't terribly surprised that, you know, outside of a
few names, there are you know a lot of folks
who didn't make it very far on the draw. I mean,
I think one of the stats was the vast majority
of folks who went deep in near was lost in
the first round yea Miami. You know, again, not a surprise.
But I think for me, the storylines that I'm following

(30:41):
that are really really interested in are obviously Gail Fonseca,
who just lost in a in a pretty big battle.
He brought out all the Brazilians.

Speaker 1 (30:52):
Oh my god, he was the atmosphere last night with
Alex Dimonor was arguably the best crowd I've ever heard.
I mean, it was incredible love that. I mean, you
always want to have a Grand Slam in South America.
I know this. You want to take away the Oceania
and you want to put it in South America. Well, Caitlin,

(31:13):
I'm here to tell you we have a Grand Slam
in South America. It's called Miami because there are so
many Brazilians, Ecuadorians, Argentinians, I mean, you name it from
the from the Southern American part of this world that
come to Miami or live in Miami now that are

(31:34):
at that tournament. It's It's always been unbelievable anytime I
played to South American and at the Miami Open and
I'm like, oh fuck, this is going to be a nightmare.
And it was, and Alex Demanoor handled it. Because the
thing that people don't realize about Alex Demnoy is put
him in an environment like that. It's like Davis Cup
and he lives for that shits. I love when he

(31:55):
won to and he just stood there and he looked
over at his box and he just went fun, you know,
because he speaks fluent.

Speaker 3 (32:01):
He speaks always. It's just like bomb loose how about that?

Speaker 1 (32:35):
And I thought it was great and fon Seca is
so fun to watch.

Speaker 2 (32:39):
I love matches like that because it sort of illustrates
I think the possibilities of tennis, not in in terms
of like sports stories and up and coming players, but
just this idea that you know, somebody who consistently does well,
a lot of grand slams, who's kind of always in
the conversation but never quite on the tip of your tongue,
Alex Demnor, you know.

Speaker 1 (32:58):
Because he keeps running with sinner like this is his
best opportunity to win a title because Youngixin is not.

Speaker 2 (33:03):
Yeah, do you think that that is emerging as a
possibility for sure because of who's left in the draft.

Speaker 1 (33:09):
Absolutely, there's no doubt that Alex Dimonor is not not
the player to beat in this tournament, but he's certainly
there and beating Fonseca last night in that environment is
going to give him so much, like, you know, just
confidence in his ability to be able to handle, you know,
one of the best players in the world right now,
certainly one of the best young talents in the world,

(33:30):
but he has the ability to win a tour.

Speaker 2 (33:32):
There's a bunch of really interesting names, like a lot
of whom I think could win it. Zverev can win
it or through feasts like he's beaten zeb They played
an eight pretty memorably in a match in the fall.
It's nice to see Seb quarter back in good forum
and healthy. He's got gayl month Feast who's like somehow
turning back time. I mean, he's just stumble elect.

Speaker 1 (33:54):
This is also like what the feast beat said in
him wells, so it could be a little of because
Sev is from he is from Florida, so this and
conditions that he really likes. It's a little bit quicker
Morphie prefers that little bit slower conditions that he was
getting in India. Well, so I think that Seb might
get a little revenge on Gael today.

Speaker 2 (34:14):
But I just think it's a great I mean, Demitravi's
still in it. What a nice thing it is to
see him beating catch enough, Like, I just I like
the fact there's just a bunch of different storylines that
are exciting.

Speaker 1 (34:24):
Well, I'm personally we haven't talked about clearly as Novak
and him sort of getting through the draw pretty comfortably.
Mussetti he plays today, that'll be interesting. Mossetti's obviously had
a great twelve months, soho has the confidence to go
out there and beat someone like Novak? But yeah, I
mean Berrettini as well playing terrific and Alex Dimonor who

(34:47):
he has next. Taylor Fritz is somebody that we haven't
talked about, who did not do well in Indian Wales,
who really wants to do well on American style, and
this is a tournament clearly that is good for him.
He goes up against lucky loser Neil Walton from so Adam,
so we'll see how well Taylor does. So you would
think that Taylor has a really good shot as well.

(35:07):
Francis Tiafo again loses. He loses to Arthur Fierce. I mean,
I just don't know what's going on with with with Francis.
He's sort of lost his mojo a little bit. I
mean it was a good three set.

Speaker 2 (35:17):
Match, but yeah, what do you think is going on?

Speaker 1 (35:20):
I don't know. I you know, maybe he's peaked. I
think he peaked like he did a couple of years
ago at the US Open. I think that, Look, he
doesn't have a lot of weapons, and at some point
you kind of do plateau at a certain place. I
think he's probably made enough for money to be super
comfortable in the rest of his life. Is that a
determining factor of pushing him to the toughest of toughest

(35:43):
of moments, Maybe, you know, sign a big, big contract
thanks to Josh Smoller, he's a terrific agent with Lula Lemon,
So you know, I don't know, I think is that
part of it? Maybe for me?

Speaker 2 (35:57):
I love Tiao, he's grief, his for it. He's really fun.
But also he's never been top ten material. To me,
his game just isn't good.

Speaker 1 (36:04):
Yeah, it's not. No, he's dynamic, and you know, he's
got a great backhand and he's I mean he is
he does.

Speaker 2 (36:10):
Everything is okay. No, his technique is totally busted on
both sides.

Speaker 1 (36:14):
His technique is busted. I mean, he's backhand is pretty.

Speaker 2 (36:16):
He shovels the backhand, and he's got a forehand that's
all over Jesus do. I love the guy absolutely and
I'd fight for him to the death. But like to me,
the fact that he made it into the top ten
was indicative of like playing above his pay gride frankly,
and like some other people kind of fallen off like you.
In all things being Eagle World FANTASYAFO should not be
in the top ten as much as I like.

Speaker 1 (36:36):
Well, he won't be.

Speaker 2 (36:37):
By the end of the and he definitely won't be
headed back anyway. But I think for me, the one
I'm watching the women.

Speaker 1 (36:43):
Yeah, let's get to the women. Oh my god, what
a great tournament we've anament, We've had some upsets. I
think the big I think the big storyline, Well, there's lots,
so let let me start with the top half of
the drawer. Obviously, Sablanca is just crushing everyone left and right.
How to you know, six four to six four match
against Daniel Collins, defending champion. But saba Anka is crushing

(37:05):
everyone in this tournament. And no surprise, your buddy chin
when has a bit of a comeback here.

Speaker 2 (37:12):
She likes the humid conditions there.

Speaker 1 (37:14):
Yeah, I mean she has been comfortably winning in straight
sets through her tournament.

Speaker 2 (37:19):
I have to say I don't like her.

Speaker 1 (37:20):
Adds, I do not like her Sablanca. I think Sabalanca
is going to beat her in straight sets as well.

Speaker 2 (37:26):
I'm just more looking can Chinwen make more progress based
on the last time she last to Sabalanca in straight sets, like,
maybe could she get a set?

Speaker 1 (37:34):
That's what I'm looking for. No, I don't think, I
don't think, But that's what Somebody else who was a
little bit surprised that they ended up going out yesterday
was Coco Goff. She was playing really well, very comfortable,
couple of wins, an O and O match against Kennon
which was crazy, and you know, Kennon beat confit of
her in the first round, and then Maria Sakari. She
took care of her comfortably, but Maria has been struggling

(37:55):
over the last couple of years. But to lose to
Magna Lynette, I mean, Lynette is this type of player
that when she gets hot, she's really quite a good player.
I mean, she reached a semi final of a Grand
Slam at one time. But to beat Coco Gough four
and four in Florida tons.

Speaker 2 (38:09):
Of support doesn't make any sense.

Speaker 1 (38:10):
It's just Coco is just yeah, there's a lot missing there,
and a lot of it just comes down to again,
the same stuff, the double folding, the foehand. It's just like,
at some point you have to go and break that
down a little bit and get some confidence on it. Look,
I'm not too worried about her, because I think when

(38:31):
she gets on the clay she plays even better.

Speaker 2 (38:33):
She's gonna deal.

Speaker 1 (38:34):
I don't care who you are, your confidence has to suffer.
And she has not gotten to a latter part of
a tournament in a long time. And when you're talking
about the consistency of an Eagershound Tech and a Sablenka,
Coco's not having that. And so she has really dropped
out of that top tier five level yep. And losing
to Magnala Dad is not a good loss at the
Miami Open for her. Pauolini also has had a tough year.

(39:00):
I like she has gotten through incidents half matches, and
that went against Osaka yesterday was big time because she
lost the first set. You know, Paulini beat you know,
got the retirement against Onji Burst sending out our love
to onscard. You know, she just can't crack it with
the injuries so over the last couple of years, and
you just wonder how much that's going to really affect
her career. To be honest, I think she wants to

(39:20):
have a family. Like, at some point you start going,
how much fucking rehab do I have to do to
get back on too? It's going to be.

Speaker 2 (39:25):
Another year, thankfully. It sounds like Froman's camp it's a
slate muscle tweak, so she'll probably be on clay no
without too long. I'm sure she won't be going back
to Charleston where she has won the tournament before, but like,
hopefully we'll it's a bummer for the tournament, which is
a bummer for the tournament because she's such a fun
so personality.

Speaker 1 (39:39):
But Paulini getting through that match against Osaka Osaka was
looking pretty good, like everyone's like, oh, here we go,
this is going to be the tournament that gets you
back on the map, and then burm. She goes out
to Pauolini who just doggedly, determinedly got through that match.
Yes today, I mean it was awesome.

Speaker 2 (39:53):
Yeah, I agree. I was really happy because I don't
think Paolini pleaded that well, no, but she just you know,
those sort of defining but yeah, I actually think those
are more important matches because anybody can win when you're
playing well and feeling great and feeling confident when you
get through something, especially against somebody who's all of a
sudden kind of found her form, and you gut it
out and you just run it down and you put
it back and play. That actually, to me is a

(40:14):
character building when that I love from Pelini for sure, and.

Speaker 1 (40:17):
For Pauolini to to know that you're playing Magdalette instead
of Naomi Osaka and the next match has to make
you feel No, I'm not saying that Lynette is not
a good player.

Speaker 2 (40:26):
Yeah, like the fact that you're sorry and he doesn't
have to go and against Coca cough.

Speaker 1 (40:29):
That's what That's what I meant. Sorry, instead of playing Coco,
who is going to have the crowd and you know,
you just know what she's capable of doing, instead you're
playing Magdalinette, that's a whole different.

Speaker 2 (40:39):
Story, for sure.

Speaker 1 (40:40):
It's just mentally.

Speaker 2 (40:41):
I like the Paladusa looked pretty good. She obviously had
like her stra the injuries. Just yeah, listen, I'm a
I'm a rat kind of fan.

Speaker 1 (40:51):
Listen. I was about to say, let's get to the
bottom half of the drawer. Because Emma Radicano has turned
has she turned her career around with that win against
Emma Navarro agreed and there super high level no doubt
that that has made her turn her possibly turn her
career around. And I you know, everyone's going to hyperbole

(41:13):
and all the shit. You don't understand. You don't understand
what it takes to gut through a match like that,
because in all sense of the word defeat, she should
have lost that match. Now she should have won it,
and then Emmon looked like she should have won it.
And it was just one of those matches that went
back and forth and Emma Neavarro, you know, I think
I put out on Twitter, you know, beware Emma Navarro

(41:36):
down a set, down a break, and someone serving for
the match, because that's when she's come back and won
so many matches this year. So I thought that was
going to happen. But Emma stepped up. That Radakanu stepped
up in that match more than I've ever seen her
step up since she won the US Open. She went
for it. She was aggressive. The only time she wasn't
really aggressive was when she served for the match at

(41:57):
five to three. She pulled back a little bit. And
you know, it's interesting. I was texting with Jill Schmoler
during the match, and I was like wow. I was like,
you know, because Jill is representing her and helping her
out a little bit, and I was like, you know,
if Emma stays, if Radakana wins this match, she has
to say aggressive. And she did that and so I
think that gave her so much confidence. She obviously wins

(42:17):
the next match with a retirement, but.

Speaker 2 (42:19):
Was yeah, it was a one way traffic.

Speaker 1 (42:22):
And then to beat Anissimova, who took out Andreva the
night before. Can we just talk about mirror. There was
no doubt that she hit the wall in that match.

Speaker 2 (42:31):
You could see it. Actually, she just looked from one
point to the next.

Speaker 1 (42:34):
Spent she was. I know that she was not feeling
well before the match, and so she went on the
court maybe a little bit not feeling good. Hence the
just her attitude had. Having the trainer come out at
two to one in the first set is highly unusual. Agree,
but you know, I'll give a credit as a seventeen
year old. She hung in there when she could have

(42:56):
given it up, especially after losing the first set. She
hung in there and looked like she was going to
win the match. And then anissam Ova just turned it
around and third set and started hitting winners all over
the place. But Mira certainly showed her age and the
fact that she hit the wall and mentally acted like
Mirra Andreva from two years ago. I mean, there was
mum left the box. Conch had lost all control of her.

(43:19):
It was just like, fuck everybody, I hate everything, I
hate being out here.

Speaker 2 (43:24):
And then a Nissamova during the service game called for
the okay, so I want to get to that.

Speaker 1 (43:31):
So the blister. If anyone follows Amanda Anissimova on Instagram,
you would have seen and a lot of people reposted
the blister on her finger. That was a really bad blessing.

Speaker 2 (43:41):
It looked like a gap, like a goal.

Speaker 1 (43:43):
It was horrible. Now, I don't know if any of
you have played tennis, certainly haven't played it professionally, and
knowing you don't know a bad guest, Yeah, let's let's hope.
But a blister that size on your finger fucking kills
when you're trying to hit the ball. Now, she asked
for the trainer, right, she asked for the trainer on
the next changeover, so to make sure because you have

(44:04):
to let the physios know because they're in the physio room.
They're in the locker room. They're not sitting by the
court unless it's the final. They're not sitting by the
court because there's only so many physios and they're doing
a tremendous amount of work and labor in the rooms,
in the locker rooms at the time of matches. So
like the amount of times I've been having a physio
wall get to the point, get the point, no, because
it's as important. So if you're in the locker room

(44:26):
and you've got four physios in there and there's seven
players wanting treatment, you're in a line, right, So a
physio will be working on you, and then a call
will come over the radio trainer needed on center court
and they have to stop the treatment, grab their bags
and run out to the court. So Amanda, let the
umpire know, please make sure the physio's out here on
the next changeover, okay, So that gives them time to

(44:47):
get out there, so you're not waiting for them. So
and of course she's up three to one in the third,
so she doesn't want to stop her momentum. And then
I'll give a credit. It was she was down or
upper game point. I can't remember. She lost some point
to go to juice. She knew immediately from hitting that ball.
Fucking hell, I cannot hit the ball anymore. And this

(45:07):
is a really important game for me. So it is
within the rules that if it's an acute injury. For example,
if someone sprains her ankle or does at knee or
falls and you know, breaks their finger or something, that's
an acute injury. So the phissia will come out and
assess if it's an acute injury. Now, if you said, oh,
I feel a bit of a pain in my knee,
they might do an assessment, let's say of an ACL

(45:28):
tear or a tear and say, oh, yeah, you've to
on your ACL or you know, you can keep playing
or it's up to you, right, So the physio makes
this assessment. If it's a cute now looking at that finger,
that's a cute. That's I cannot hit the tennis ball
now without being in a tremendous amount of pain, which
Anissa overplayed, I believe three points after asking for the physio. Now,

(45:51):
she knew going into that there was going to be
juice add and it could go juice add juice add juice,
add like ten more times. Meanwhile, the finger's getting worse.
She can't hit the ball, so she decided to call
the trainer. Now a lot of people are pat to
stab there because that's at allowed in the rules.

Speaker 2 (46:05):
We didn't set this up. She called the trainer in
between first and second serves. That's why this was controversial.
Not only did it happen in the middle of a
service game, but she called it in the middle of
a service motion. I agree with you completely that it's
within the rules and if you can't swing a racket
without screaming pain. But watching the match, it was in
between first and second serves.

Speaker 1 (46:26):
I don't remember that.

Speaker 2 (46:26):
I'm Mira Andreva.

Speaker 1 (46:27):
I don't remember that. And because of that, I remember
walking up to the chair and saying, can I get
the physio and the again, I'm not doing that partic
for one, She's like for blister for my finger or whatever,
and she said, what the empire is? Like, what do
I need to And this has happened to me before.
It's like, if I asked for the fucking trainer, just
call the trainer. You don't need to ask me what
my injury is because I don't want my opponent to

(46:48):
know what my injury is.

Speaker 2 (46:49):
On the other hand, there are players who abuse it
to such a degree that you can't give everyone the
bed of the doubt. No, well that's the lake Novak
is getting a manicure on his toes half the time
when you know, like famously, and everyone's like, is this
guy injured? Is this a blisters? Is it thing?

Speaker 1 (47:05):
Well, there's a lot. It's not just throw back under
the bus. This has been a lot of players that
have down a lot of shitty things. I don't think
Amanda has that. From what I know, Amanda does.

Speaker 2 (47:13):
Not have that agreed agreed and I'm not bringing us
around a teture. I'm bringing I'm bringing this up to
explain why so many people were upset about it, because
I think the way you explained it sounded like, of course,
a logical person would allow Amanda Nissimova to address a
well and also Caitlin shrieking paint injury. But the reason
it was controversial is because people maybe don't understand the
rules of the context about how long it takes to
get to the court, or the fact that she is

(47:34):
allowed to do it in the middle of play if
it is an acute injury, which I think it was,
so I'm not I'm not trying to pile on Mara
won the game.

Speaker 1 (47:40):
Yeah, okay, true, But actually the.

Speaker 2 (47:43):
Reason I brought this up is because Mira Andreva, under
normal circumstances, is cool as a cucumber, as she's been
and how well coached she is in the last year,
certainly since the beginning of the year, doesn't care about that.
Mira Andreva, who hits a wall, who can't control herself anymore,
is freaking out and this is becomes the thing that
is like the reason that she loses the match. Yeah,

(48:03):
I mean, and I think that's the difference between somebody
and command of their emotions and then themselves with their
coaches voice in their head saying like keep cool, you
got this, breathe yes, and somebody who's like, fuck this,
I'm gonna burn it all down, like I'm mad at
everyone so much so that aman Anissamberg got some blowback
on the socials, showed everyone her blister and while she
was doing so, flip the bird, well.

Speaker 1 (48:23):
She flipped the boot was awesome. It was on the
bird finger, which is I would not have been any
better that it was great, but also she then went
out and lost comfortably the next day to Emma Radakanu.
But also, what the WTF is that? What the what
the WTF on the scheduling of having her play at
night and putting her third on the next day. Now,

(48:44):
a lot of people won't think, well, that's pretty late,
But also I want to know how we have these
ten day events and players are having to do that
kind of a schedule. That is bullshit.

Speaker 2 (48:54):
There's been a lot of critique of the Miami Open.

Speaker 1 (48:56):
Why isn't she scheduling the next night?

Speaker 2 (48:58):
Again, I will play devil's advocate in this scenario as
much as I want to critique the Miami Up in
a tournament that I feel should be in different hands
at a different venue, potentially at a different time of year,
and say, I have now comfort believe that scheduling tennis
matches is unbelievably difficult because of the amount of matches
you have to get through, whether throws, wrenches, and plans.

(49:20):
Some matches go fast on some courts and then they're
sitting empty. Other matches take forever and there's a bottleneck.
So I get that you do have to like kind
of keep a lot of balls in the air literally
and figuratively to make sure that everyone. Plus there's TV
rights and China is paying, and they wanted their player
at a certain time, and ESPN wants to probably presumably
an American or this time, you know, tennis channel. So

(49:41):
like you know, there's a lot of factors here that
need to go into it. Do we think this person's
a huge draw? Maybe in this tournament, but maybe not
the next one. So how do we handle which sized
stadium to put them on? You know, A lot of
things are more politics, but.

Speaker 1 (49:53):
That would have been very, very hard for Amanda to
back up because they didn't get finished till about.

Speaker 2 (49:58):
Did you watch the match?

Speaker 1 (49:59):
I did?

Speaker 2 (49:59):
I mean I watched every point of that basically, I
mean not to saying anything away from Amarata Kana, who,
when healthy and in sound mind, which I think she
appears to be to your point, is a free, creative, thoughtful,
elegant player like I can't say enough a better game,
which is why I'm always rooted for her. I'm I'm
erat Kana, but you know, barely made that a match.

(50:20):
Like she was shaking ball, she was on sorts. She
could tell she was also different completely.

Speaker 1 (50:27):
Atmosphere, playing at night, heavier conditions. Then you go on
the day, you know, breezy conditions in Miami, it's lost,
like you can't see the ball properly. Like she had
looked like a until maybe maybe maybe two o'clock in
the morning. Maybe I would stress probably more two or
three in the morning.

Speaker 2 (50:47):
And then she's playing you know, you know, during the day,
late hour or something.

Speaker 1 (50:50):
It's like waking up the next day and having to
go out there and play against you know, a player
who's playing tremendous tenness. Anyway, So Emma Radicano, I'm super
happy that she has done well because she is a
name and a player that we need to do well.
And I have to say this. I think six months ago,
if you'd said, is Emma Radakanu going to be inside
the top ten again, I would have said I doubt it.

(51:10):
And it's not because I didn't believe in her ability.
I mean, this is a Grand Slam champion, but I
just felt like the injuries and the no coach, coach,
no coach, all the stuff, the stalker, you know, she
always has just so much going on around her, and
I just feel like with this confidence, there's no question

(51:32):
she can be back inside the top ten because the
tennis that I saw her play against Emma Navarro in particular,
it was great, was so good, it was such good tennis,
and her serving was better. I do believe that she
she's gonna win Wimbledon. Everybody.

Speaker 2 (51:46):
And the last thing I'll say about Emma, which is
why I like watching her play, it's still clear that
she's very intelligent, which to me, I understand why that
that's I thought you're gonna say, I understand, which I
really to as an extremely intelligent person myself. No, she's
still clear that there's a lot going out in her head,
which is why she plays a really creative style when
she is confident and while she plays like sort of
befuddled when when she's not. And I don't know that

(52:08):
the coaching and the sort of reaction that she's the
sort of crowd that she had around her has really
appreciated that about her. I think she has a part
time woman coach who's a British player, who kind of
like seems to like economics, who's a yeah exactly, who's
like a titan of industry and in the business world.
But I think she must feel like she's on the
level got yeah, and also got like the right amount

(52:29):
of distance, Like, I don't think she needs somebody like
barking down her throat, like treating her like she's a
seatball hitting a type of player, because she's not. She
needs somebody to be like, hey, you got this. Like
you've got a lot of tools. Maybe it's too many,
but let's focus.

Speaker 1 (52:40):
If she can work on her coming into the net
and her swing bollies yeah, and being a little bit
more aggressive in that term and that way, I think
there's no question she can be back in Well.

Speaker 2 (52:49):
She's certainly certainly fun to watch and I'm really happy
for her, most importantly that it looks like she's having
fun out there.

Speaker 1 (52:54):
Well, she's got a tough one against Jessicagula. She's just
getting through her color Skaya match where I don't know
what it is with her and Cullen Skya, but they
played barn Burner matches. Every match goes seven to six
and the third it's crazy. But I think once Jess
got through that match, she was comfortable against Costuok yesterday
two and three. I think Jess is going to be

(53:16):
tough to beat at this tournament. She practices and lives
in southern South Florida, and so these conditions are perfect
for her. But one player that's getting a lot of
like publicity is Alexandra Ila. Oh yeah, no wild card,
we wild card. Now My player Ellen Perez, who was
down in Miami with the doubles player hit with Alexandra

(53:40):
one day. It was before the tournament. Because she doesn't
really know anyone out there. She's like, you know, she's
a kid, like nineteen years of age. She's out there
and she had up looking for someone to hit with, right,
and so Ellen said, well, I know her a little bit,
you know, because Ellen talks to everybody, and she's like,
I'll see if she wants to hit, and she's like, yeah, sure,
i'll hit. So they went out and hit for an
hour and it was such a good practice really, and

(54:00):
she's a lefty and it plays similarly to Allen in
a lot of ways, you know. Now, Allen was a
decent singles player in her own right, and they were
crushing four hands to each other and it was a
lot of fun to watch actually, and she was a
sweetheart but sort of had no idea how to how
things worked and was a little bit and her coach
was a little bit the same, and it was just
a really nice hour of practice and I thought, I

(54:22):
don't know if she's good enough to you do well
and doesn't really crack the ball big enough. And we
sort of were a little bit like, oh, I don't know,
And there she is. She's in the quarter finals. I
mean ad Meddle. She had to walk over yesterday against Bodoza,
you know, to beat Madison Keys for and too. Maddie
Kesey just had a couple of bad losses in the
last couple of weeks. It'll be interesting to see how
she bounces back. I believe she's playing Charleston, which she's

(54:45):
one before, so so we'll see.

Speaker 2 (54:46):
I'm putting on my chips in the Mattie keys Grass
quote Susy.

Speaker 1 (54:51):
I think she's going to be tough to beat at
when we'll too egat Chion Tech. It's just again just
crushing people left and right. She's had a couple of
tough first sets. She's gone through seven six seven six
on two occasions last night against Fitzelina and the match
before against Elise Mertens. But she goes up against Ila today.
I think that's going to be a comfortable victory in

(55:12):
two sets unless Alexandra, Alexandra, can you know she should
with something special?

Speaker 2 (55:18):
But I think her special thing should be as a
graduate of the raff and Adel Academy, have Rafa flying
in sitting in her box. Wouldn't that be fun? And
also because you get such a Rafa fan little games, Oh.

Speaker 1 (55:32):
Yeah, that could be.

Speaker 2 (55:33):
Wouldn't that be exciting? If you look up and you're
like heroes in your opponent's box?

Speaker 1 (55:38):
Can I just can I just talk to you about
speaking of players boxes?

Speaker 2 (55:42):
Sure?

Speaker 1 (55:43):
Is this out on the old socials?

Speaker 2 (55:44):
This has to be And this is the end. This
is the end.

Speaker 1 (55:46):
This is the end of the podcast.

Speaker 2 (55:47):
So we're building the end.

Speaker 1 (55:49):
We're building to put crescendo here. But I was watching
Novak play the other day and he missed the forehand
and he looks up at his playerbox and they of course,
the camera goes to the playerbox and here's Andy mar
Are just sitting there just looking like a stun mullet, like,
you know, not giving him a stun mullet, a stunned mullet.
Have you ever heard that?

Speaker 2 (56:07):
Good carry on?

Speaker 1 (56:07):
Very australianism. Basically, somebody just sitting there. Light deer in headlights. Sure, right,
that's what Americans say. We don't have deers.

Speaker 2 (56:15):
You have mullets.

Speaker 1 (56:15):
We have mullets.

Speaker 2 (56:16):
Which is a bird, it's a fish. Okay.

Speaker 1 (56:18):
Yeah. So anyway, so there's Andy just sitting there like
stun mullet, and he looks over and his physio gestures
to him how to hit a forehand, like cover the forehand,
cover it, cover it or whatever, get it out in front.
And I'm thinking to myself, I have had physios work
with me on the tour, not many because I couldn't
afford it, but from once in a blue moon. If

(56:41):
I looks over at my playbox after missing a forehand
and my coach was sitting there and my physio told
me how to hit a fourhand, I would fucking tell
them to leave. I'd be like, shut the fuck up.
Why you are a physio. You have never hit a
forehand in your life, certainly in a professional way, and
you're telling me how to hit a fourhand.

Speaker 2 (56:59):
Once again, you're making an assumption, maybe with the tourist
allows you with physios. The bigger question is why did
Andy Murray say anything?

Speaker 1 (57:05):
Because Andy Murray knows there's nothing he can tell him
that's going to make a difference in that situation.

Speaker 2 (57:10):
What is that?

Speaker 1 (57:10):
Because nobody knows what more?

Speaker 2 (57:12):
What is that?

Speaker 1 (57:13):
Because nobody knows more how to hit a forehand in
the court. The Novak Djokovic knows exactly what he has
to do to hit a good forehand? Does he need
to have sometimes it reiterated to him by his coach maybe,
but his physio and the same thing, the same thing happened.
You know, I'm the one that looks like an idiot
because the guy wins more than anybody has ever done

(57:35):
in history, so clearly something works for him. Maybe the
physio or the trainers hear what the coach has told him,
so then they say it to him because oh no,
he's speaking in Serbian.

Speaker 2 (57:46):
Maybe he just needed some VABs.

Speaker 1 (57:47):
But I don't know. But like even at the French
Open a number of years ago, and I may have
told this on the pod before, but I'm on the
court with Sam Stozer and Novak was playing on the
court next to us, just down below us. But I
could see the court and the entire time the fitness
trainer is telling him how to hit a foehand like
the guy that's with Janick Sinner now, the Italian dude. Yeah,

(58:08):
he was out there and he was showing Novak where
to hold his hands, that's how to hit in return.
And I'm thinking to myself, what the fuck does this
fitness trainer no more than Novak Djokovic or his tennis coach,
which would have been at the time.

Speaker 2 (58:26):
Grand Slam winner Gurney Vinevitch.

Speaker 1 (58:27):
I have to I think, I don't think helped me
understand it.

Speaker 2 (58:31):
I will explain it to you in the only way
that I can understand it, which is, does this fitness
trainer or fitness trainer his body, physio, whatever it is.
Do these guys know more about tennis than you the
Vanjin professionals. No, sure, certainly not, whether they've played or not.

Speaker 1 (58:43):
I don't.

Speaker 2 (58:44):
I can't speak to that, but I think watching Novak
play for the last better per twenty years, Novak is
an energy guy. He's a guy who wants a chatter.
He wants back and forth, he wants a little gibber jab.

Speaker 1 (58:57):
So give him, give him, give his fist.

Speaker 2 (59:00):
To me, what is so fascinating about hiring the stoic uh,
you would call a stoic in the coaching box. Yes,
because you know, sitting there with his arms crossed, and
it's like, what do you know? Do I get why
he would fill his box with a bunch of serbians,
like some of whom are getting rowdy and some of
whom maybe know more than others. Yes, get it makes sense.

(59:22):
Even Goron was pretty calm, but he got into it
because I think that's what Novac likes. I think that's
what he needs. I think that's what he wants. He
wants like a little bit of an audience to play out.
I think Novak, in a very compelling way, like we're
not is doing an interesting psycho drama at all times
in his own head. Mostly some supporting characters absolutely agree.

(59:43):
So if I look over and I want you to
be in my psycho drama, it's like you're gonna not participate,
You're just gonna sit there. No again, fitness trainer, he's
just looking around for somebody to get something. And then
the fitness trainer's like, yeah, okay, i'll physio. I'm gonna
I'll get in Yeah, sure, okay. So I think that's
what's happening. Do I doesn't make sense to me? No,
it doesn't make any more sense to me than.

Speaker 1 (01:00:02):
It does you.

Speaker 2 (01:00:02):
But I think that's just I'm explaining. I think what
is happening, which is he needs a lot of chippiness.
He needs to need a lot of chips.

Speaker 1 (01:00:09):
Yeah, I get it, like I get like him looking
up and which is.

Speaker 2 (01:00:12):
Also why it doesn't make any sense to me that
Andy Murray is his coach. It doesn't that make any sense.

Speaker 1 (01:00:17):
Well, as I told you in the last part, I
did see them out there in Miami and they were
talking about his forehand and I was like, oh my god,
look at this. Look at the minutia that is going
on here. It's what makes him so great is that
he's always looking for that edge. But the edge that
I don't understand is why are you taking direction on
how to hit a tennis ball from a guy that

(01:00:37):
cannot play tennis?

Speaker 2 (01:00:39):
You know what you're still.

Speaker 1 (01:00:41):
I get, like, hold on, let me finish. I get
what you're saying. He needs the chippiness, he needs, he
needs the energy. Okay, that's fine, get up and give
him that.

Speaker 2 (01:00:48):
I actually wasn't going to contradict you. I was going
to say, let's wrap this up, because I actually think
since you're still on Twitter. Let's hear what people have
to say.

Speaker 1 (01:00:55):
Oh good one, what, oh blue guy? Please?

Speaker 2 (01:00:58):
Whatever?

Speaker 1 (01:00:58):
Please please? People go to Blue Scott.

Speaker 2 (01:01:00):
You talk to people on the internet. I don't really
talk to Renee. Tell her what you think is happening,
whatever medium. If you message me with it, I will
try to pass it on. But go to Renee and
tell her what you think is happening in this psychodrama
to which we only have a tiny bit of priven Now.

Speaker 1 (01:01:14):
All right, everyone, we'll see you and hear from us
next week. By