September 30, 2025 • 40 mins
The tennis establishment is facing yet another complaint from players, and this one's got the top players signed on and is repped by the big guns—Larry Scott. Let's see if they can make progress on meaningful profit sharing, player organizing and schedule changes. They'd better before the Asia swing completely collapses from retirements! We talk Coco vs. Belinda, Meddy vs. Zverev and the encouraging addition to Lerner Tien's entourage in the form of Michael Chang. Takes a champ to know a champ, after all.
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:16):
All right, are were recording. We're recording.
Speaker 2 (00:18):
Ah, hi, everybody, Welcome to the Renee Stubs, a tennis podcast. Caitlin,
how excited are you about the fact that it isn't snowing.
Speaker 3 (00:25):
Yet here in New York.
Speaker 2 (00:26):
I I mean, I'm sitting outside in a T shirt.
Speaker 1 (00:29):
Yeah. This is always the part of the year that
I struggle with because I don't really fall really confounds me.
So I'm looking. I love winter because I like skiing
and snow. I don't really tend to enjoy this time
of the year. So I'm trying to, you know, change
my attitude, good, change my whole growth. Yeah. Just you know,
(00:52):
for long time listeners of this podcast, you've probably heard
us grow and change.
Speaker 2 (00:56):
I don't know about that, but anyway, trying try. You're trying, so, Caitlin,
I sent you an article the other day. Yes, it's
getting talked about a little bit on the state of
tennis in an overall way, I guess is the best
way to put it. And how that you know, Look,
we talk about it all the time, about this Asia swing,
about what's important after the US opens, blah blah blah,
(01:18):
all the things. So you are a great you know,
you were a former journalist who still are a journalists
like you would have read this article. So I said
to you, take a look at it and see what
you think based on what you read, and give us
a little synopsis of it, because it's kind of going
around what's happening right now, and we've talked about it.
The tours need to change somehow for these players, for
(01:39):
the benefit of the players.
Speaker 1 (01:40):
Yeah, and I think, actually, this is a really good
time to talk about this because even though we've talked
about it about it at various points in the year,
We've talked about it at various points over the years.
This part of the year, which is now happening, there's
tournaments in Shanghai and Beijing are rape with retirement. They're
rife with people shutting in their seasons. You know, since
(02:02):
we last spoke, alenas Fitelina has decided that her season
is over, and she's not the only one. People have
been pulling out of Aijing Arena. Seblink did so a
couple of weeks ago, which, you know, it's a major tournament,
it's a mandatory and you don't have the number one
player in the world who is you know, coming off
of a US Open championship.
Speaker 2 (02:18):
Yeah, so it's like she just sort of has this
great moment. She's the biggest thing in tennis at the
moment in tennis as far as women are concerned. I
mean just saying with the eyeballs on the US Open
and then all of a sudden gone like Kevin Sena
for like.
Speaker 1 (02:31):
A month, one hundred percent. And you know, obviously she's
trying to preserve her body and make sure that she
has a strong run to the WTA finals, which a
lot of players get motivated by, especially the ones who
are kind of on the bubble. She is not. She qualified,
you know, very early in the year. But obviously there's
a big purse associated with playing the tour final tournaments.
But yeah, it's for a lot of other people kind
(02:53):
of not you know, the juice isn't worth the squeeze
to play this last bit of the tournament either of
the season, either because they're injured or because they know
that they don't have a chance to accrue the kind
of points they'd need to make a lot of money,
and so they shut it down. Now, no, I don't
blame them at all. It's unfortunate. I'm blame the players
at all. I don't blame the players at all. It
is something I've reiterated and actually a piece we're about
(03:14):
to publish from a Chinese author talking about how, you know,
when we see empty stands a lot of these tournaments
in the Asia swing, it's because the tournaments haven't necessarily
set them up to succeed with scheduling and this kind
of thing. Why. But my goal here is not to talk
about Yeah.
Speaker 2 (03:27):
But also, Caitline, I mean, you lived in China. It's
a very talk about you know, Coloss, It's like they're
working there in the day. You know, I can get
people that come to the tennis in the daytime there
very rarely.
Speaker 1 (03:39):
It's on the newer end of the spectrum for spectator sports,
and you know, I think there are some inherent challenges,
not least of which is the fact that you know,
there aren't always the stars that are committed that show up.
You know, I think that's true for all tournaments. So
my goal here is not to necessarily discuss Asia specifically.
(04:00):
It's just it's the calendar. Now. The reason this becomes
germane is it was revealed earlier this week that a
letter was sent over the summer to the tours, no
sorry to the Grand Slams. Now. This letter was signed
by very very notable players, including when we're talking about
right now, Ernest Sablanca, you get Schianta Cocoa, GoF Carlos
(04:21):
Alchrisienix Center and Jack Draper.
Speaker 3 (04:23):
I mean, that's that's that's some stopouf between.
Speaker 2 (04:27):
That's not like some you know, fringe couple of players
on tour that started the PTPA couple and we.
Speaker 1 (04:34):
Should talk about the PTPA because they are also engaged
in lawsuits against both tours and now the Slams. So
all of the governing bodies in tennis, which are arguably seven,
between the two tours, the four Slams, and the IF
which technically administers the Olympics, it's a lot of governing
bodies and a lot of people to sort of a
(04:55):
lot of chefs in the kitchen. Now, the fact that
the PTPA a couple of years ago launched with Novak
Djokovic's support, Vashik Paspiciales support mostly men. They later added
some women and have kind of been lobbying lawsuits at
various bodies in tennis has largely been seen, I would
say as fair to surmise as kind of a nothing burger.
(05:18):
That's not to say that there's not good ideas behind
it or there's not intelligent people involved. It's just it's
unclear to me what their strategy has been, although the
goal seems very clear, which is to reform a lot
of this schedule and reform a lot of the prize
money sharing. Because even though we see every year these
slams are announcing bigger and bigger prize pools for the
winners and the participants as a percentage, they are making
(05:40):
so much more money than they are sharing, certainly more
than other leagues right on a sheer percentage side, and they,
the players as essentially labor, are saying, we, yes, great
that you throw us a bone every year and increase
the prize, but we know that you're making so much
more money than you're sharing, and we want participate in
(06:00):
it now.
Speaker 2 (06:01):
And I think there needs to be just so people
out there understand, like the US Open, for example, is
a non for profit, so they use this in a
way in some respects to say, well, but we're a
non for profit. We use all this money to put
back into tennis and run our programs and run our
junior programs and pay our coaches and build tennis courts,
places and all that sort of stuff, which is true,
(06:22):
which is true, but I would like to see more
numbers based on Okay, that's true, how much are you
spending and how much are you keeping and how much
are you profiting on and how much are you making
on interest?
Speaker 1 (06:34):
And a lot of the cases of these non profit
entities which control the sports Tennis Australia, the French Tennis Federation,
the Lawn Tennis Association and collaboration with all England and
London like these are nonprofits, as you say, and a
lot of their operation is yes, to theoretically grow the
game at a grassroogs level, but also they own other entities,
(06:55):
they own o their tournaments and you know, the salaries
of the people who work there are sizable. You know, famously,
when Patrick McEnroe ran player development, he was famously pocketing
a ton of money when none of the players made
it as Grand Slam champions. So there's fair critique, I
think for a lot of the governing bodies in terms
of what they're doing. Now, what's interesting about this letter
(07:18):
was that a Novak Djokovic didn't sign it, so maybe
he feels like maybe the PTPA more accurately represents his interests,
although notably, he is also not a part of the
lawsuit officially filed against the Slams and the Tours. Do
you think that he has given up?
Speaker 2 (07:33):
No? Do you think that he knows and is like,
I'm supportive, but I'm not putting my.
Speaker 3 (07:37):
Name to it.
Speaker 2 (07:38):
Yes, I think he Do you think it's because he
knows he's going to be retiring in the next twelve.
Speaker 1 (07:41):
It's hard to know. I mean, I actually really appreciate
the fact that Novak has tried to be a reformer.
I have had a number of things to critique him
about through the years, but this is not one of them.
I think the fact that he wants the tennis Tour
to be quote unquote better is actual, genuine.
Speaker 3 (07:58):
And yeah, great, I agree with that.
Speaker 1 (08:01):
I think the problem for a lot of these athletes,
and I would say this with you know, absolute generosity,
is that I don't think that they all agree on
what is quote unquote better, what does better look like.
I think there's probably some big ideas that everyone can
agree about, like, hey, this season needs to be shorter,
this tournament structure went from having ten ish mandatory tournaments.
Speaker 3 (08:23):
I am twenty.
Speaker 2 (08:24):
I don't mean to laugh at you, but I do
think it's funny because as much as I love Carlos,
it's like I have recently seen that he is literally
signed up for like every exhibition in December, playing an exhibition.
Speaker 3 (08:36):
He is playing an exhibition.
Speaker 1 (08:37):
Yeah, me, he's doing with in New Jersey, he's doing
with the one in Saudi Arabia. Like, it is hard
to take them seriously when they're like, yes, the schedule
needs to be smaller so that I can go play
exhibitions in the Miami suburbs, like what you know. Again,
not so much critique, it's just a little inconsistent.
Speaker 3 (08:55):
Yeah, that just makes me. That's what makes me laugh.
Speaker 2 (08:57):
But I will say I think I don't think I
will say this about Carlos. He doesn't complain about the schedule. No,
he's the few who doesn't. He doesn't complain about it,
And I think that's where he gets away with it
a little bit of playing these exhibitions because he's like,
I'm not complain.
Speaker 1 (09:12):
About it, really, And he also.
Speaker 2 (09:14):
Doesn't play certain tournaments based on the fact that he
doesn't want to.
Speaker 1 (09:17):
Yeah, and I think you know, we've talked about Igo
Schiantak a number of times on this tournament because she's
been really vocal about it. She is also signatory to
this letter, and you know she doesn't play exhibit she
does not. She manages her schedule, I think really intelligently.
So the last point I want to make about this
letter is that the players, and this is really smart night,
(09:38):
actually like to get to the bottom of more of it.
They have retained a guy named Larry Scott to represent them.
Speaker 3 (09:44):
And if people don't know who that is, go ahead.
Speaker 1 (09:46):
Larry Scott is a really interesting person. He ran the WTA.
Some would say he ran at the best it has
ever been run. With aldi question that is at that
time that is a popular opinion. I'm sure there are
people who, like in any of these situations, would well yes,
but and I'm not a position to say yes. But
what Larry Scott is not a nobody. He's somebody who
(10:06):
understands the intricacies of the sport very very well. He
spent a lot of times in other sport organizing and
being in positions of leadership, and I think one thing
that I've always felt tennis needed more of was fresh blood,
fresh eyes, more experienced business people from outside of the sport.
And if you look at the ATP, for example, the
(10:26):
person that they just hired to replace Massimo Cavelli, the
former CEO, is another player turned agent turned executive. The
tours and these governing bodies are rife with people who
used to play pro tennis. They are not rife with
people who've run businesses and succeeded in other areas of finance,
the world sport, et cetera.
Speaker 3 (10:47):
Do you call that?
Speaker 1 (10:49):
I mean, it's not necessarily nepo because these aren't you know,
it's not like these are dynastic rulers that you know,
appoint their sons and daughters. But it's it's in and
it's incestuous. Just because somebody is a very good tennis
player or an okay agent doesn't mean that they will
necessarily be very good at running an organization. And I
(11:10):
think if you look at what the tourist have accomplished,
it speaks to the fact that they're not good enough.
Speaker 2 (11:15):
Yeah, I mean, listen, I think that there are and
have been former coaches or whatever. I think Craig Tiley
is a great example. Craig was a college tennis coach
at Indiana.
Speaker 3 (11:25):
That's crazy.
Speaker 2 (11:26):
No, sorry, not Indiana, Illinois. He was the head coach
there and coached you know, some great players during his time.
Kevin Anderson, I believe was there many many a really
good college player went and he was the coach, including
Michael Costa who is now a comedian on The Daily Show.
Speaker 3 (11:43):
So and wrote a book called Lucky Loser.
Speaker 2 (11:46):
If you haven't read it, it's pretty funny and gets
a little deep into some hilarity. But you know, the
bottom line is that I think Craig did an amazing job.
Speaker 3 (11:55):
I don't know how he got the job at.
Speaker 2 (11:57):
Tennis Australia based on the fact that he was a
tennis coach, but he has done an amazing job at
Tennis Australia of changing the landscape of the Australian Open
for the better. And I think that there is a
possibility of seeing somebody like that who doesn't come from
necessarily a finance background or has run a big company.
But you know, there are people out there that can
(12:17):
do a really, really great job. But I think the
ATP and WTA tends to be a little bit more insular.
Who is who do you know who ran it on him.
Look at Steve Simon who was a tournament director of
Indian Wells and took over as WTA CEO, and did
he do a great job.
Speaker 3 (12:33):
I don't think so.
Speaker 2 (12:33):
Didn't really grow it as much as I think he
could have. And I think a lot of it is
because he came from sort of like a tennis background
and a tennis organization background, as opposed to like you're saying,
someone who comes in from an outside business perspective. You know,
we always talk about a great friend Sophie Goldschman who
wants a usk in snowboard looks she's gone through the
gamut and actually, interestingly enough, worked under Larry Scott at
(12:55):
the WTA and really admires him a lot, and she's
done an incredible n Skian snowboard.
Speaker 1 (13:01):
And I think the reason she's done an amazing job
at us Kean Snoward, getting them new events, new sponsorships,
grown the sport is because she was able to take
lessons from running the Surf League, from working in the
rugby union, working at the NBA under visionary leadership. Yeah,
I look at somebody like Craig Morris, who you know
is heading up the brand new coaching initiative that the
(13:21):
USTA is hoping to really ignite a lot of grassroots
play with his idea that anybody can be a coach,
from a grandmother to somebody who's high school jym teat
or to whatever, to just get new people into the sport.
There are entrepreneurial minded people. Having seven governing bodies is
a disaster and stuff and the amount of repetitive function
that you have in competition that you have. If you're
(13:44):
Audi and you want to sign tennis, you want to
get into tennis. You're a sports car manufacturer and all
of a sudden you want to sponsor tennis. Who where
do you start? Do you start with the player? You
start with a tour?
Speaker 3 (13:53):
Well that's what.
Speaker 1 (13:53):
Do you start with a tournament? Do you start with
a governing body? And the amount of conflicts of interest send,
the amount of red tape and the amount of agents,
and the amount of conflicting messages and repetition in all
these bodies, it makes it impossible for you to really
participate in it without you know, paying off everyone and
(14:13):
having an easy time of it. Whereas if I want
to go and be okay, I'm going to sponsor F one,
I'm going to do one deal.
Speaker 3 (14:19):
Yeah done?
Speaker 2 (14:20):
Yeah right, So what was your what was your end
synopsis of that?
Speaker 1 (14:25):
My takeaway is that the tours should be and the
governing bodies should be on high alert. I think they
are caught on the back foot. I think that they
do not have a lot of I think their their
responses to this lawsuit felt very defensive and they felt
very opaque. They were like, we're committed to a transparent structure.
(14:48):
We will you know, we look forward to a productive dialogue.
It was a lot of corporate cover your ass language
that didn't feel transformational or that they took the matter seriously. Now,
I'm not too worried about the tours the tours being
sued by the PTPA. I don't think the PTPA has
much teeth, and I also don't think the tours really
have a reason to exist. Now that said, I think
the Slams absolutely do. They're the ones that have all
(15:10):
the power, lucrative cydboarship dollars, they have all the relationship
with the audience. When people think of Tennis, they don't
necessarily think of the ATP, THEWT Most of people don't
know what those things stand for. They think of Wimbledon,
the US Open, the French and Australia, and maybe they
one or two other tournaments. They're besides the players, they
are the only valuable entities in the sport. I think
it would behoove them to play nicely and create a
(15:31):
one body amongst each other and let the tours fall away.
But again, that would take for them, for each individual
body to give up a lot of power, and I
don't foresee them thinking they should do that. But I
think if Larry Scott, along with between the six signatories
I named a winner of every Grand Slam in the
last two years, those are serious people who seriously command
(15:55):
sponsorship dollars and eyeballs. And if those players, along with
somebody as a students Lario's, are coming after you, you
better sit down and figure out a deal.
Speaker 2 (16:02):
Yeah, because I can tell you from a television standpoint
as well, there's about four people that move the dial
on ratings, and you know it's it's Carlos, It's it's Novak,
and those three really the ones that really spike. We
know that when Carlos plays Yannick, it's a huge spike.
We know that when Coco plays a Saballenka. It's a spike,
but nobody's really you know, Saballenka is sort of not
(16:25):
in the higher upper echelance of like spiking TV ratings,
and neither is Yanixinner. They're certainly there, but they're not
like people are going, oh my god, I want to
watch you onixin oh my god, I want a sable Anca.
But they do, particularly in America, where a lot of
the needle is pushed. I want to watch Alcoraz, I
want to watch So those players hold a lot of
power in negotiations overall because also television will listen to
(16:48):
what they're saying too, because it's really important for them.
Speaker 1 (16:51):
So yeah, and I think just to round out the thought,
what they're asking for is a higher percentage of pay
from the Slams, which is we've treated they deserve them.
Is you know the Slams are making more and more money.
It doesn't. It hasn't kept a peace with what the
players are making. They also would like the season to
be shorter. We've talked ad nauseum about that because it's
(17:11):
just such a no brainer. The amount of mandatory events
went from ten to twenty essentially in the last ten years,
and it's crazy. The season is one hundred days to
two hundred plus days.
Speaker 3 (17:20):
Yeah, but you know it's also you don't get to mind.
Speaker 2 (17:22):
It's the tours expect you to play x amount and
then on top of that the Grand Slams. Right, so
you know, if you if the mandatory events are fourteen,
for example, and the wt actually don't know what they are,
I should have. I should know it's sixteen sixteen for
the WTA, so the Slams plus the Slams, so that's
twenty event.
Speaker 3 (17:40):
That's a lot. You might be out there going, no,
it's twenty weeks. No, it's not.
Speaker 2 (17:43):
It's the two weeks of all the w T one
thousands ATP one thousands, few weeks.
Speaker 3 (17:47):
Of the major titles.
Speaker 2 (17:49):
And and look, you know, I know I played on
the tour for twenty two years and it is a long,
long year. But I would argue that it is tougher
and it's more arduous. These matches are longer from the
first to the finals. And if you look at the results,
even this week in Beijing, players are winning a lot,
players are losing a lot, players are pulling out. It's
a very very very very hard twelve month sport. I mean,
(18:11):
really it's eleven months, but it is brutal, and the
amount of travel and time changes and surface changes, and
it's you seeing people lose their minds from time to time,
and Medvedev comes to mind.
Speaker 3 (18:23):
I mean, it's not easy.
Speaker 2 (18:25):
And so that's where the greats really they really do
have my absolute respect, because to do it week in
and week out for ten, fifteen to twenty years is
bloody remind.
Speaker 1 (18:35):
Yeah, And I think if you zoom out and look
at the overall popularity of the sport and how much
it has grown through a couple of these names and
a couple of these big events, you know, I don't
know that the sport has kept a peace. And also
we're not making it easy for new fans. We're not
making it simple for people to participate in watching and
attending and following along. So in addition to pay in
a smallish season that makes more sense and is not
(18:56):
in direct conflict with each other, they also want contributions
to pension, health, maternity benefits, and they want to create
a new player council. Now, I will put this on
the players because I've heard from friends of mine who
work at the PTPA that the players say they want
all these things, but then when it comes time to advocate,
their nowhere to be found. Yeah, that's true, and I
think that that's probably true. You know, obviously they're busy
(19:17):
and it takes time out of their day to go
and do stuff that isn't a brand sponsorship deal or
isn't a recovery from a practice. So I get that
it is a little bit of a zero some game
on their time and resources. That said, you know, if
you want things to be better, you have to participate.
So hopefully this this this letter that they sent the
slams is it looks like from the responses it has
been taken very seriously and also like we want the
(19:39):
sport to be better.
Speaker 2 (19:40):
I think if the I think if the slams and
then may just really smat here, that can really this
can be a quid pro quir This can be like
you scratch my back, ey, scratch youles. Let's let's make
a bit of a supatua. Let's do the right thing
by each other. And you know, get you guys need
to control your players association and in regards to this
as well.
Speaker 3 (19:57):
So I think there's a big opportunity.
Speaker 1 (19:59):
Yeah, I would love.
Speaker 2 (19:59):
I think some like Larry Scott can really make this
happen because he is very smart.
Speaker 1 (20:05):
And I think he understands how the ecosystem works. And
so my hope is that they, yeah, they create a
partnership that is fruitful and then allows for a lot
of the deadweight to be trimmed away.
Speaker 2 (20:17):
Yeah.
Speaker 1 (20:17):
I think that's that's the problem, and nobody wants to
lose their perch. And I think the truth is a
lot of people have to We've talked about this.
Speaker 2 (20:32):
If you say, well, you know, the US Open pay
the winner's five million dollars, I'm like, okay, I get it.
But you do understand someone like Carlis Alcarez can make
a million dollars for one appearance at an exhibition exhibition,
so if he paid seven exhibition nights, he's making seven
million dollars. Okay, So you have to you have to
think about that when you're talking about these top players
(20:53):
and you say, well, you know, the players rank fifty
shouldn't be making that because they can.
Speaker 3 (20:56):
That's not the point.
Speaker 1 (20:57):
I think for most lay people, the idea of making
many millions of dollars, it's crazy. So it's most useful
to couch it as a percentage. If the players are
making three percent of the overall purse and they're providing
more than fifty percent of the value, then yes, something
needs to change. Now I pulled those numbers out of
thin air. But again, percentages, it is hard to fathom
(21:17):
how much more money that the tours are making off
the players, and the players are making off the tours.
Speaker 3 (21:24):
And so for that.
Speaker 1 (21:25):
Reason, you know, it's it's interesting. And again to your point,
it's Jermaine. So because it's Germaine, because we're watching the
Asian Swing, because we have all these amazing matches going on,
and some that have been rife with retirements. Let's talk
about what you've been seeing, because you've been watching more
tennis than I have.
Speaker 3 (21:38):
Yeah, this week has been really fun.
Speaker 2 (21:40):
Actually, I haven't been able to watch a lot live
just because it's in the middle of the night, so
it's been a pain in the ass. So I've watched
a lot of replays and various things like that. But
it was interesting. One of the questions that we were
asking after the US Open was would co cook Off play.
Speaker 3 (21:54):
The Asian Swing?
Speaker 1 (21:55):
Yeah, and she is playing the Asian playing the Asians wing.
Speaker 2 (21:59):
Well, she is battling. Yeah, let me tell you something.
She battled in her first round. She's battled against Belinda
Benchicic today in three sets, lost the first set. Like,
you know, I don't know whether Coco is going to
come out of this year feeling like she can literally
do anything in her life, knowing the obstacles that she's
(22:21):
had to go through with her technique and with the
scrutiny and all of the above.
Speaker 3 (22:27):
But my god, that kid vites.
Speaker 2 (22:28):
Look she battled in this match against Benchic But can
I just say also, in the middle of that match,
the reason why Coco, I think, found her way is
that Belinda Benchicch decided to complain about Coco's team and
how they were clapping and being like, you know, saying
stuff before she was about to serve and stuff, and
(22:49):
she took offense to it. Listen, there was like twelve
people in the stands, and even Coco said that on
the change over, She's like, there's like nobody in the stance.
Speaker 3 (22:57):
So of course they sound a lot.
Speaker 2 (22:59):
Louder than they would if like it's a packed stadium, okay,
because you know, everybody be talking, but because there wasn't
a lot of people in the stands that they obviously
became a little more vocal and Belinda, Belinda took offense
to it and said something to the umpire.
Speaker 3 (23:12):
Look, I can tell you one thing.
Speaker 2 (23:15):
If you're winning a match match and you're in a
winning position, which Bencic was at that point, upper set
and in the second set, you just got to go
and play like you do not want to add fuel
to somebody's fire, particularly someone like Coco, to like get
her in the mindset to like fight and battle, which
she did in that second set and then subsequently went
on to win the match. So I just think, like
(23:36):
it's just crazy that these players like lose their mind
like that, because it's like what I used to say
when people would play against Serena. It's like, don't poke
the bear, Like when you're going to give a player
something to sort of focus on, like, well, if you
I'm gonna like rather than thinking about like I'm sure
Coco was on her own head at that point and
I'm like, god, am I going to lose and blah blah.
(23:57):
Then she's like, uh no, no, now you're disrespecting me
and my team.
Speaker 3 (24:01):
I'm going to focus.
Speaker 2 (24:02):
So I would just say anyone who's playing against the
top player, don't poke the bear and don't poke Cocoa
Golf because she's usually probably one of the most respected
players on tour and she's not going to stand for it,
and she'll stand up for herself and her team. And
so I think that was well done by her. And look,
she went on to win the match. I have to say,
(24:22):
Emma Radakhanu, although she didn't beat Jessica Bagoola, had three
match points to win that match and the tennis was fantastic,
like from the beginning, like Emma has. I think Emma's
gotten so much better with this new coach that she's
had now, week in and week out working on things,
and she's on the cusp of sort of breaking through again.
Speaker 3 (24:42):
I would argue that she's kind of sort.
Speaker 2 (24:44):
Of back as a very as a top twenty player. Yeah,
I feel like she's in the top twenty category now
and I really think that the way she pushed Jesstera
Bagoola and Jessicagoola's back end down the line, can I
just say, if you do have a match point against
her and you had a great shot to her backhand
to cover the back end down the line, because she
hit two back ends on the line on two match
points of the three match points that were unbelievable.
Speaker 3 (25:05):
The first one was a joke.
Speaker 2 (25:06):
I mean, Emma hit the most incredible backhand return cross court.
It was so deep and Jess just you know, got
that left leg down there anchored and just went down
the line with the back end. It was like unbelievable,
and then you thought, I can't get any better than that.
And then another match point, Emma comes in on a
really on you know how I feel about coming in
a cross court foehand severev She goes inside out, hits
(25:27):
a perfect shot but doesn't cover the line and just
just makes it back end down the line again. So
it was great tennis. And then Jess ran away with
the third set. A couple of couple of tough first
games in the set in the third, but you can
imagine that Emma's like just spewing about the three set
match points that she had. But it was great tennis,
and really, I feel like Jess might be really tough
(25:48):
to beat there after that because it's almost like when
you're down match points, you kind of feel like you're
playing with house money, So certainly feel like Jess will
be really hard to beat and Asia swing tends to
be really quick the court.
Speaker 1 (25:58):
Yeah, this suits her does quite a bit. I would
just going back to run and cunning for a second.
I was really thrilled to see how she backed up
Miami on the grass, and she didn't have a great
US Open. She had two very close matches with Sabalanca
over this hardcourt summer series. And I'm hoping for her
that she is a stalwart in the top twenty because
when she plays well and all the scrutiny. Talk about
(26:19):
scrutiny for you know, Coco, all the scrutiny with her
game and her coaching and a da da da da da,
and like, you know, we are really really hard on
players who have reached the heights of the game and
struggled to stay there. That's more true of Emma than
it is of Coco, obviously, But I think.
Speaker 2 (26:33):
You know, look, Katelein, we have to go back and say,
this girl won the US Open, So, like you know,
in the most unbelievable It's like it's like it's a
story that if a movie was made about it, we
as tennis Punnetts would be.
Speaker 1 (26:44):
Like that would never happen, realistic.
Speaker 2 (26:46):
There's no chance someone's coming through qualifying and winning a major.
It's not happening. And she did. So it's like the
most unbelievable fairy tale story arguably in tennis history, what
she did, you know what I mean, it's just like
so it's kind of like, you know, on the men's side,
to say Goran Ivanissovitch winning Wimbledon back in the day,
when you know he cares a word, you know if
you're remember having on the podcast and he talked about
(27:08):
that where he didn't even have enough bloat and shirts
and rackets because no one thought he could get to
the second week and he ends up winning Wimbledon. I mean,
at the same time, this is the guy made the
final a couple of times, so we knew what he
was capable of doing, certainly on grass, and no Emma
Radikano winning the US Open through qualifying is a fairy tale.
Speaker 3 (27:24):
And then you know, having to back it up.
Speaker 2 (27:26):
And she's a beautiful young woman and she's got she's
English and press on her. So I don't know, I
just love her doing well. I love truly and playing
good tennis. I've said this the entirety of the season.
I love her game. Her game to me a game,
I love her game. I think her technique is just
really fun to watch because she takes the ball early.
She's not enormous, but she takes big plays a little
(27:49):
bit like Jeanie Bouchard used to great return on the loan,
right on the line, go for it.
Speaker 1 (27:54):
On the grays forehand.
Speaker 2 (27:55):
I think She's clearly is a much better movie than
Genie was. But but yeah, they remind me a lot
of each other the way they play.
Speaker 1 (28:02):
I think her ball is so clean and I like
the way she constructs points. So for me, watching her
is really fun. She has one of my favorite games
on court. Yeah, and also, like you know, because she
is not unattractive and has a major market behind her
in the form of the UK, Like they always make
sure she has great outfits and you know, like she
she has star quality. I think that's really compelling shot
(28:25):
a way that Jill Schmoller. I mean kudos, because yeah,
she's she comes correct only tournament, so I think the
tour is better with her in it, and I would
agree to me her the complete season she's had from
Miami Sunshine double to you know, grass through now the
hard courts like it's it's been encouraging because I think, again,
one of the things I like so much about tennis
is just the very very very diverse amount of game
(28:48):
styles and backstories and play and all this stuff, and
it really does, you know, I think, lend itself. But yeah,
my hope is Pagola takes this momentum and runs away
with it, because again, the tour is really good when
she's winning big tournaments.
Speaker 2 (29:00):
Yeah, and you know, you would argue that Jess is
sort of coming into her own after a great US
Open where she came so close to making another final,
and and I would argue that Emma, you know, having
her back inside like the top twenty and really pushing
these plays. When I was watching that match, I thought, hmm,
I think Emma Radakanu can make another semi of a Slam, yeah,
and a Major and maybe even a final. She keeps
(29:21):
playing like this because there are a lot of parts
of her game that can get even better. And so
you know, when you've won a major title before, you
know how to do it, so I do. I wouldn't
have said this two years ago that she would make
it back inside the top ten, but I actually do
think she can make it back inside the top ten.
And you know me, Caitlin, I don't say those things.
Speaker 1 (29:37):
No, you don't, you don't.
Speaker 2 (29:38):
Can we just talk about the fact that Medvedev, even
though he's had the worst year of all time, still
refuses to lose Ti Zveref.
Speaker 1 (29:47):
One thing he's not going to do, yeah, is lose
to Alexander Zev. Ever, and said somebody on social media
being like, you know, even when Daniell Medvedev is losing
to taxi drivers and janitors out here, he's still not
going to lose Ta Zverev. And thank you for your service.
This has been a crazy year to watch you play, Donnas.
You'r US Open was insane.
Speaker 2 (30:09):
Your US Open, your US Summer swing was insane, with
the bash, with the I've never seen someone could pitulate
after a loss more than I saw him capitulate in Washington, DC,
where he threw a racket from mid court after losing
the match, arguably on the most crazy match point I
think I've ever seen in my whole entire life. And
(30:29):
that's saying something because I've seen some pretty crazy shit
and then almost pitching it into the crowd and then
literally we've all we've all seen that Satan dry it
the water drop drink bottles you know that are made
of steel, essentially him absolutely crushing two of them. It
was just And then the next week he just walked
(30:50):
off the court and left his rackets. I mean he
was going through a mental breakdown, there's no question. But
sadly for ol many it looked like he's like getting
his shit back together. He's finally worked with a new
coach in Thomas Johansen, which is a great move and
nothing to say anything about his old coach, who I
loved and who had an incredible relationship and run with mehdi,
(31:11):
But it's time you need a new voice, and he's
got a new voice in Thomas Johanssen. So he wins
that match. He looks great, he's got his shit together
and Thomas Johnson Swedish, so he's not going to put
up with all this, you know, absolute nonsense on the court.
But sadly he had to default or quit today against
Leerna Tien. Can we just talk about Learner Tiene? Yeah,
the dude only beats good players. It's crazy.
Speaker 1 (31:32):
I guess if you have to go out and have
a record that's lapseated. You would want to have the
finals a top of Beijing, top ten, you know, sniper status.
Speaker 3 (31:41):
That's unbelievable.
Speaker 1 (31:42):
He loses sometimes bafflingly, but when he wins, he wins big.
Speaker 3 (31:46):
Yeah.
Speaker 2 (31:46):
I mean I'm just good. Good for you, dude. I
mean here he is. Is he in Beijing?
Speaker 1 (31:51):
Is it in Beijing that he been in Darren Beijing? Oh?
Speaker 2 (31:53):
So he's in the finals of Beijing Finals. It's a
ATP five hundred in Beijing. It's not a thousand. That
WTA is a w TA one thousand and in Beijing.
But the guys is a five hundred. But still, it's like,
way to go, dude, No, unbelievable way to go.
Speaker 1 (32:07):
Do you think he gets past center in the final? No,
hard to imagine. You know, he beats he beats group
players when he plays well.
Speaker 3 (32:15):
Here's the thing.
Speaker 2 (32:16):
Yanick lost a set to Alex Deemenor, And I am
so happy for Alex Demonor that he won a set
because that will make him not feel so bad because
every time he plays Janick Cinner he gets crushed.
Speaker 3 (32:28):
It's because I told you.
Speaker 2 (32:29):
I've told you this on the pod everyone, I've never
seen a player play so well and have absolutely zero
chance of beating someone with he stray and open. In
that match that they played, it was like it was
like demon all was playing incredible, wasn't missing a ball
and literally had no chance to win against Yanick. So
it's nice that he got a set, and certainly I
(32:50):
think it will be an incredibly entertaining match with Leon
because he is going to go out.
Speaker 3 (32:54):
They're like, ma fu get and I've got nothing to lose,
and you know what I do. I beat really good players. Sure,
so this will be a test for learners where he
really is at. But there's no.
Speaker 2 (33:02):
Question that Learna ten is a top at least a
top twenty player for sure, no question he can be
in the top ten the way he plays. He is
so good and having Michael Chang now coaching him really
helps him think bigger term, right, And that's the thing
about having these former great players on your bag and
coaching you. If they've done it themselves like Thomas Johansen
(33:22):
has done, like Michael Chang has done, they understand what
to say to you in certain times of a tournament
and a match and after you win matches of how
to prepare you for the next match, and not getting
ahead of yourself and actually saying to you, what do
you mean you don't think you can win this match? Right,
That's where it's important to have somebody around you that
(33:42):
can make you think differently, right, that can make you
think bigger.
Speaker 3 (33:46):
And everyone out there who's listening to this, it's.
Speaker 2 (33:48):
Probably like, well, yeah, you know, you all go to business,
you all go to your jobs, you all have work.
If someone believes in you and tells you what you
can do better and how to get better and what
you can and achieve at.
Speaker 3 (34:01):
Work, you're like, my boss believes in me.
Speaker 2 (34:03):
Yeah, you know, I'm going to put that work in
or maybe I can get that managerial job. Maybe I
can get maybe I can be CEO one day. If
my CEO believes in me. It's the same in tennis.
It's exactly the same in tennis. The lif does wonders.
Speaker 3 (34:16):
Yeah.
Speaker 2 (34:16):
So if when you have somebody that you respect and
look up to tell you those things, man, it makes
the difference. So I think Michael Chang is really helping
him in that regard. It's sort of similar to Conchitita
Martinez when she started working with Miran Dreva. It's like
when you have a great former player who said not
only a great career in tennis herself, but also a
great coaching career and taking people to winning Grand Slams.
You believe them when they tell you that stuff because
(34:39):
you know they're not full of shit, because they're not
going to say It's like if I tell someone they
can be in the top ten, I'm not going to
say that just because you know, I want them to
feel good about themselves. I'm not going to tell them
they can be top ten. I can say they can
be top twenty, and then they go, great, God, you
really believe in me. And then maybe if they get
into the top twenty, you go, you know what, now
that I see it, I think you can be top ten.
So it's you have to have trust in the per
(35:00):
and that you're working with, and so I think Michael
Chang is going to make an incredible difference there.
Speaker 1 (35:03):
So it's fun to see Michael Chang back in the
tennis spear in a big way. Both of us who
grew up playing with his rackets. Yeah, well he was
pump you know, rebuck.
Speaker 3 (35:15):
He was my age.
Speaker 2 (35:16):
So well, the thing I did wear were those Rebuck pumps.
The pumps, so me and Lisa Raymond, we remember we'd
get them and put him on. Lisa Raymond loved those shoes.
She pumped the side of the thing and they would.
Let me tell you something, Rebuck, you should bring those back.
Speaker 1 (35:30):
They should. I know, Rebuk was They kind of tried to,
didn't they They did. I don't know what happened, but
I would love to see them dray again now that
we've got Michael Chang on our screens.
Speaker 3 (35:37):
It was awesome.
Speaker 2 (35:38):
Carlos Alcarez played a match against Casperu the other day.
It was so fun and it was interesting to me
because we talked about it at the US Open. The
way he won that tournament was that he didn't lose
a set basically, right except you know, when he played Yannick,
but like throughout the whole tournament, he didn't.
Speaker 3 (35:53):
Lose the set. He was so focused.
Speaker 2 (35:55):
I think he realized, like, if I'm going to win
these slams against Yannick, I cannot go four or five
sets every single match and have a like little mental
walk about, you know, which he does from time to time.
And it's like, dude, you cannot have mental walkabouts and
go three sets.
Speaker 3 (36:10):
Well he did that against Rude.
Speaker 2 (36:12):
He went into a little bit of la la land
last his opening set and then got his shit together
and one in three sets. But it's interesting when he's
playing best of three and not playing a slam how
he's kind of still has those little mental walkabouts.
Speaker 3 (36:26):
But he got the job done. I love the hair.
I love the hair. Yeah, me too. I'm into it. No,
for sure, I'm into it.
Speaker 1 (36:33):
We have By the way, have we ever figured out
what the tattoo is? Has he ever?
Speaker 2 (36:36):
You haven't seen it yet? No, but I will get
to the bottom of you. I will tell him to
take his shirt off.
Speaker 1 (36:42):
You think it's on his top, buddy.
Speaker 2 (36:43):
I think it's probably on his top, buddy. Okay, I'll
be sure to find out. Don't you worry people, because
that bet that he made about the Brooklyn Bridge was
with me.
Speaker 1 (36:50):
Yeah, no, that's serious.
Speaker 2 (36:52):
Even said it on ESPN's coverage when he said, I
have to get the Brooklyn Bridge because I made a
bet with somebody before the tournament that was with me,
and we have it on film. Go to Tennis channel
looking up all right, guys, Well, eagercon Tech is also
playing great I am.
Speaker 3 (37:07):
I'm super pumped.
Speaker 2 (37:09):
Alcarez beat Taylor Fritz in the final there and straight sets.
Talk about getting your shit together and winning it quickly.
Speaker 3 (37:17):
That was a very quick rump. It was it was,
it was clean.
Speaker 1 (37:22):
I'm excited. What I'm watching in Beijing is I'm watching Evalise.
She's how about that one I've a rebuked to watch.
She's so fast. I watched her a lot at the
US Open because she's you know, they put her on
outside courts because she's not a super big.
Speaker 3 (37:37):
Nice she's not.
Speaker 1 (37:38):
She's fisty and a fader. She's got kind of Pawelini
vibes to me, which is like small, fast and fun,
which is a combo. I like. I'm also watching to
see how chin Wen looks after her well surgery.
Speaker 2 (37:52):
Well, she's had to pull out, which you're saying, like
continually for this reason.
Speaker 1 (37:57):
See how she ends the season, because well, she's always
such a yamic player.
Speaker 3 (38:00):
Three Love and third decided to stop.
Speaker 2 (38:02):
Yeah, probably realize that, you know, maybe it was starting
to hurt her a little bit, and didn't want to
push through it, knowing how important it was not to
do that, but also knowing how important it was to
play in Beijing because it's such a big tournament for
her and for her Chinese fans.
Speaker 3 (38:15):
And for the w t A Tour.
Speaker 2 (38:18):
So it's nice to searr out then competing and clearly
you know, but that's where you once it gets to
a point where you're like, am I gonna? Am I
going to go back three months here if I keep
continuing to play this match. So I'm sure it was
incredibly hard. But we have seen a lot of pullouts
in this tournament, like walkovers and people quitting in the
middle of matches, which again goes back to our original conversation,
(38:39):
which is about fucking we need some re hard Yeah,
it's not we need to reform the tennis world. Now
that there's all these new fans and everyone has, you know,
a stake in the game, let's let's get you know,
let's make the best possible product. The best possible product
is not an unfocused, unwieldy, injury plagued circus that can't
(39:01):
It's kind of like the w NBA, and you know
how I'd love to bring a little WNBA, but it's
the same as WNBA.
Speaker 3 (39:06):
There's so many injuries this year, and.
Speaker 2 (39:09):
It's because the schedule is so unbelievably condensed and brutal
and physical, just like tennis a little bit different.
Speaker 3 (39:16):
You can't hit your tennis opponent. If you do, you're
out of there.
Speaker 2 (39:19):
But my point is physicality as in running and hitting,
and it's hard and these a lot of top players
are getting into visicalia Caitlin Clark like it's happening on
the regular basis. So like tennis and like the WNBA,
it's like the bigger and more popular and more money
that's going to these athletes. You have to take care
of them better, you know, because if they're not there,
(39:40):
that is a problem. And so yes, I think what
we talked about at the start of this pot is
super important and that's where that's where we need to
be better of protecting them and taking care of them.
And this is where an opportunity with the players and
the majors and the heads of the tours need to
recognize they need to change something.
Speaker 1 (40:02):
Yeah, well, hopefully a lawsuit will do that. We'll do that.
Speaker 3 (40:04):
Law suit can change a lot of things.
Speaker 1 (40:06):
Can All right, let's wrap it up and see how
our favorites fare in another week or so. As we
look to the end of the season. Thanks so much
for having me over. Hey, you're welcome after it's all
All right, are were recording. We're recording.
Speaker 2 (00:18):
Ah, hi, everybody, Welcome to the Renee Stubs, a tennis podcast. Caitlin,
how excited are you about the fact that it isn't snowing.
Speaker 3 (00:25):
Yet here in New York.
Speaker 2 (00:26):
I I mean, I'm sitting outside in a T shirt.
Speaker 1 (00:29):
Yeah. This is always the part of the year that
I struggle with because I don't really fall really confounds me.
So I'm looking. I love winter because I like skiing
and snow. I don't really tend to enjoy this time
of the year. So I'm trying to, you know, change
my attitude, good, change my whole growth. Yeah. Just you know,
(00:52):
for long time listeners of this podcast, you've probably heard
us grow and change.
Speaker 2 (00:56):
I don't know about that, but anyway, trying try. You're trying, so, Caitlin,
I sent you an article the other day. Yes, it's
getting talked about a little bit on the state of
tennis in an overall way, I guess is the best
way to put it. And how that you know, Look,
we talk about it all the time, about this Asia swing,
about what's important after the US opens, blah blah blah,
(01:18):
all the things. So you are a great you know,
you were a former journalist who still are a journalists
like you would have read this article. So I said
to you, take a look at it and see what
you think based on what you read, and give us
a little synopsis of it, because it's kind of going
around what's happening right now, and we've talked about it.
The tours need to change somehow for these players, for
(01:39):
the benefit of the players.
Speaker 1 (01:40):
Yeah, and I think, actually, this is a really good
time to talk about this because even though we've talked
about it about it at various points in the year,
We've talked about it at various points over the years.
This part of the year, which is now happening, there's
tournaments in Shanghai and Beijing are rape with retirement. They're
rife with people shutting in their seasons. You know, since
(02:02):
we last spoke, alenas Fitelina has decided that her season
is over, and she's not the only one. People have
been pulling out of Aijing Arena. Seblink did so a
couple of weeks ago, which, you know, it's a major tournament,
it's a mandatory and you don't have the number one
player in the world who is you know, coming off
of a US Open championship.
Speaker 2 (02:18):
Yeah, so it's like she just sort of has this
great moment. She's the biggest thing in tennis at the
moment in tennis as far as women are concerned. I
mean just saying with the eyeballs on the US Open
and then all of a sudden gone like Kevin Sena
for like.
Speaker 1 (02:31):
A month, one hundred percent. And you know, obviously she's
trying to preserve her body and make sure that she
has a strong run to the WTA finals, which a
lot of players get motivated by, especially the ones who
are kind of on the bubble. She is not. She qualified,
you know, very early in the year. But obviously there's
a big purse associated with playing the tour final tournaments.
But yeah, it's for a lot of other people kind
(02:53):
of not you know, the juice isn't worth the squeeze
to play this last bit of the tournament either of
the season, either because they're injured or because they know
that they don't have a chance to accrue the kind
of points they'd need to make a lot of money,
and so they shut it down. Now, no, I don't
blame them at all. It's unfortunate. I'm blame the players
at all. I don't blame the players at all. It
is something I've reiterated and actually a piece we're about
(03:14):
to publish from a Chinese author talking about how, you know,
when we see empty stands a lot of these tournaments
in the Asia swing, it's because the tournaments haven't necessarily
set them up to succeed with scheduling and this kind
of thing. Why. But my goal here is not to talk
about Yeah.
Speaker 2 (03:27):
But also, Caitline, I mean, you lived in China. It's
a very talk about you know, Coloss, It's like they're
working there in the day. You know, I can get
people that come to the tennis in the daytime there
very rarely.
Speaker 1 (03:39):
It's on the newer end of the spectrum for spectator sports,
and you know, I think there are some inherent challenges,
not least of which is the fact that you know,
there aren't always the stars that are committed that show up.
You know, I think that's true for all tournaments. So
my goal here is not to necessarily discuss Asia specifically.
(04:00):
It's just it's the calendar. Now. The reason this becomes
germane is it was revealed earlier this week that a
letter was sent over the summer to the tours, no
sorry to the Grand Slams. Now. This letter was signed
by very very notable players, including when we're talking about
right now, Ernest Sablanca, you get Schianta Cocoa, GoF Carlos
(04:21):
Alchrisienix Center and Jack Draper.
Speaker 3 (04:23):
I mean, that's that's that's some stopouf between.
Speaker 2 (04:27):
That's not like some you know, fringe couple of players
on tour that started the PTPA couple and we.
Speaker 1 (04:34):
Should talk about the PTPA because they are also engaged
in lawsuits against both tours and now the Slams. So
all of the governing bodies in tennis, which are arguably seven,
between the two tours, the four Slams, and the IF
which technically administers the Olympics, it's a lot of governing
bodies and a lot of people to sort of a
(04:55):
lot of chefs in the kitchen. Now, the fact that
the PTPA a couple of years ago launched with Novak
Djokovic's support, Vashik Paspiciales support mostly men. They later added
some women and have kind of been lobbying lawsuits at
various bodies in tennis has largely been seen, I would
say as fair to surmise as kind of a nothing burger.
(05:18):
That's not to say that there's not good ideas behind
it or there's not intelligent people involved. It's just it's
unclear to me what their strategy has been, although the
goal seems very clear, which is to reform a lot
of this schedule and reform a lot of the prize
money sharing. Because even though we see every year these
slams are announcing bigger and bigger prize pools for the
winners and the participants as a percentage, they are making
(05:40):
so much more money than they are sharing, certainly more
than other leagues right on a sheer percentage side, and they,
the players as essentially labor, are saying, we, yes, great
that you throw us a bone every year and increase
the prize, but we know that you're making so much
more money than you're sharing, and we want participate in
(06:00):
it now.
Speaker 2 (06:01):
And I think there needs to be just so people
out there understand, like the US Open, for example, is
a non for profit, so they use this in a
way in some respects to say, well, but we're a
non for profit. We use all this money to put
back into tennis and run our programs and run our
junior programs and pay our coaches and build tennis courts,
places and all that sort of stuff, which is true,
(06:22):
which is true, but I would like to see more
numbers based on Okay, that's true, how much are you
spending and how much are you keeping and how much
are you profiting on and how much are you making
on interest?
Speaker 1 (06:34):
And a lot of the cases of these non profit
entities which control the sports Tennis Australia, the French Tennis Federation,
the Lawn Tennis Association and collaboration with all England and
London like these are nonprofits, as you say, and a
lot of their operation is yes, to theoretically grow the
game at a grassroogs level, but also they own other entities,
(06:55):
they own o their tournaments and you know, the salaries
of the people who work there are sizable. You know, famously,
when Patrick McEnroe ran player development, he was famously pocketing
a ton of money when none of the players made
it as Grand Slam champions. So there's fair critique, I
think for a lot of the governing bodies in terms
of what they're doing. Now, what's interesting about this letter
(07:18):
was that a Novak Djokovic didn't sign it, so maybe
he feels like maybe the PTPA more accurately represents his interests,
although notably, he is also not a part of the
lawsuit officially filed against the Slams and the Tours. Do
you think that he has given up?
Speaker 2 (07:33):
No? Do you think that he knows and is like,
I'm supportive, but I'm not putting my.
Speaker 3 (07:37):
Name to it.
Speaker 2 (07:38):
Yes, I think he Do you think it's because he
knows he's going to be retiring in the next twelve.
Speaker 1 (07:41):
It's hard to know. I mean, I actually really appreciate
the fact that Novak has tried to be a reformer.
I have had a number of things to critique him
about through the years, but this is not one of them.
I think the fact that he wants the tennis Tour
to be quote unquote better is actual, genuine.
Speaker 3 (07:58):
And yeah, great, I agree with that.
Speaker 1 (08:01):
I think the problem for a lot of these athletes,
and I would say this with you know, absolute generosity,
is that I don't think that they all agree on
what is quote unquote better, what does better look like.
I think there's probably some big ideas that everyone can
agree about, like, hey, this season needs to be shorter,
this tournament structure went from having ten ish mandatory tournaments.
Speaker 3 (08:23):
I am twenty.
Speaker 2 (08:24):
I don't mean to laugh at you, but I do
think it's funny because as much as I love Carlos,
it's like I have recently seen that he is literally
signed up for like every exhibition in December, playing an exhibition.
Speaker 3 (08:36):
He is playing an exhibition.
Speaker 1 (08:37):
Yeah, me, he's doing with in New Jersey, he's doing
with the one in Saudi Arabia. Like, it is hard
to take them seriously when they're like, yes, the schedule
needs to be smaller so that I can go play
exhibitions in the Miami suburbs, like what you know. Again,
not so much critique, it's just a little inconsistent.
Speaker 3 (08:55):
Yeah, that just makes me. That's what makes me laugh.
Speaker 2 (08:57):
But I will say I think I don't think I
will say this about Carlos. He doesn't complain about the schedule. No,
he's the few who doesn't. He doesn't complain about it,
And I think that's where he gets away with it
a little bit of playing these exhibitions because he's like,
I'm not complain.
Speaker 1 (09:12):
About it, really, And he also.
Speaker 2 (09:14):
Doesn't play certain tournaments based on the fact that he
doesn't want to.
Speaker 1 (09:17):
Yeah, and I think you know, we've talked about Igo
Schiantak a number of times on this tournament because she's
been really vocal about it. She is also signatory to
this letter, and you know she doesn't play exhibit she
does not. She manages her schedule, I think really intelligently.
So the last point I want to make about this
letter is that the players, and this is really smart night,
(09:38):
actually like to get to the bottom of more of it.
They have retained a guy named Larry Scott to represent them.
Speaker 3 (09:44):
And if people don't know who that is, go ahead.
Speaker 1 (09:46):
Larry Scott is a really interesting person. He ran the WTA.
Some would say he ran at the best it has
ever been run. With aldi question that is at that
time that is a popular opinion. I'm sure there are
people who, like in any of these situations, would well yes,
but and I'm not a position to say yes. But
what Larry Scott is not a nobody. He's somebody who
(10:06):
understands the intricacies of the sport very very well. He
spent a lot of times in other sport organizing and
being in positions of leadership, and I think one thing
that I've always felt tennis needed more of was fresh blood,
fresh eyes, more experienced business people from outside of the sport.
And if you look at the ATP, for example, the
(10:26):
person that they just hired to replace Massimo Cavelli, the
former CEO, is another player turned agent turned executive. The
tours and these governing bodies are rife with people who
used to play pro tennis. They are not rife with
people who've run businesses and succeeded in other areas of finance,
the world sport, et cetera.
Speaker 3 (10:47):
Do you call that?
Speaker 1 (10:49):
I mean, it's not necessarily nepo because these aren't you know,
it's not like these are dynastic rulers that you know,
appoint their sons and daughters. But it's it's in and
it's incestuous. Just because somebody is a very good tennis
player or an okay agent doesn't mean that they will
necessarily be very good at running an organization. And I
(11:10):
think if you look at what the tourist have accomplished,
it speaks to the fact that they're not good enough.
Speaker 2 (11:15):
Yeah, I mean, listen, I think that there are and
have been former coaches or whatever. I think Craig Tiley
is a great example. Craig was a college tennis coach
at Indiana.
Speaker 3 (11:25):
That's crazy.
Speaker 2 (11:26):
No, sorry, not Indiana, Illinois. He was the head coach
there and coached you know, some great players during his time.
Kevin Anderson, I believe was there many many a really
good college player went and he was the coach, including
Michael Costa who is now a comedian on The Daily Show.
Speaker 3 (11:43):
So and wrote a book called Lucky Loser.
Speaker 2 (11:46):
If you haven't read it, it's pretty funny and gets
a little deep into some hilarity. But you know, the
bottom line is that I think Craig did an amazing job.
Speaker 3 (11:55):
I don't know how he got the job at.
Speaker 2 (11:57):
Tennis Australia based on the fact that he was a
tennis coach, but he has done an amazing job at
Tennis Australia of changing the landscape of the Australian Open
for the better. And I think that there is a
possibility of seeing somebody like that who doesn't come from
necessarily a finance background or has run a big company.
But you know, there are people out there that can
(12:17):
do a really, really great job. But I think the
ATP and WTA tends to be a little bit more insular.
Who is who do you know who ran it on him.
Look at Steve Simon who was a tournament director of
Indian Wells and took over as WTA CEO, and did
he do a great job.
Speaker 3 (12:33):
I don't think so.
Speaker 2 (12:33):
Didn't really grow it as much as I think he
could have. And I think a lot of it is
because he came from sort of like a tennis background
and a tennis organization background, as opposed to like you're saying,
someone who comes in from an outside business perspective. You know,
we always talk about a great friend Sophie Goldschman who
wants a usk in snowboard looks she's gone through the
gamut and actually, interestingly enough, worked under Larry Scott at
(12:55):
the WTA and really admires him a lot, and she's
done an incredible n Skian snowboard.
Speaker 1 (13:01):
And I think the reason she's done an amazing job
at us Kean Snoward, getting them new events, new sponsorships,
grown the sport is because she was able to take
lessons from running the Surf League, from working in the
rugby union, working at the NBA under visionary leadership. Yeah,
I look at somebody like Craig Morris, who you know
is heading up the brand new coaching initiative that the
(13:21):
USTA is hoping to really ignite a lot of grassroots
play with his idea that anybody can be a coach,
from a grandmother to somebody who's high school jym teat
or to whatever, to just get new people into the sport.
There are entrepreneurial minded people. Having seven governing bodies is
a disaster and stuff and the amount of repetitive function
that you have in competition that you have. If you're
(13:44):
Audi and you want to sign tennis, you want to
get into tennis. You're a sports car manufacturer and all
of a sudden you want to sponsor tennis. Who where
do you start? Do you start with the player? You
start with a tour?
Speaker 3 (13:53):
Well that's what.
Speaker 1 (13:53):
Do you start with a tournament? Do you start with
a governing body? And the amount of conflicts of interest send,
the amount of red tape and the amount of agents,
and the amount of conflicting messages and repetition in all
these bodies, it makes it impossible for you to really
participate in it without you know, paying off everyone and
(14:13):
having an easy time of it. Whereas if I want
to go and be okay, I'm going to sponsor F one,
I'm going to do one deal.
Speaker 3 (14:19):
Yeah done?
Speaker 2 (14:20):
Yeah right, So what was your what was your end
synopsis of that?
Speaker 1 (14:25):
My takeaway is that the tours should be and the
governing bodies should be on high alert. I think they
are caught on the back foot. I think that they
do not have a lot of I think their their
responses to this lawsuit felt very defensive and they felt
very opaque. They were like, we're committed to a transparent structure.
(14:48):
We will you know, we look forward to a productive dialogue.
It was a lot of corporate cover your ass language
that didn't feel transformational or that they took the matter seriously. Now,
I'm not too worried about the tours the tours being
sued by the PTPA. I don't think the PTPA has
much teeth, and I also don't think the tours really
have a reason to exist. Now that said, I think
the Slams absolutely do. They're the ones that have all
(15:10):
the power, lucrative cydboarship dollars, they have all the relationship
with the audience. When people think of Tennis, they don't
necessarily think of the ATP, THEWT Most of people don't
know what those things stand for. They think of Wimbledon,
the US Open, the French and Australia, and maybe they
one or two other tournaments. They're besides the players, they
are the only valuable entities in the sport. I think
it would behoove them to play nicely and create a
(15:31):
one body amongst each other and let the tours fall away.
But again, that would take for them, for each individual
body to give up a lot of power, and I
don't foresee them thinking they should do that. But I
think if Larry Scott, along with between the six signatories
I named a winner of every Grand Slam in the
last two years, those are serious people who seriously command
(15:55):
sponsorship dollars and eyeballs. And if those players, along with
somebody as a students Lario's, are coming after you, you
better sit down and figure out a deal.
Speaker 2 (16:02):
Yeah, because I can tell you from a television standpoint
as well, there's about four people that move the dial
on ratings, and you know it's it's Carlos, It's it's Novak,
and those three really the ones that really spike. We
know that when Carlos plays Yannick, it's a huge spike.
We know that when Coco plays a Saballenka. It's a spike,
but nobody's really you know, Saballenka is sort of not
(16:25):
in the higher upper echelance of like spiking TV ratings,
and neither is Yanixinner. They're certainly there, but they're not
like people are going, oh my god, I want to
watch you onixin oh my god, I want a sable Anca.
But they do, particularly in America, where a lot of
the needle is pushed. I want to watch Alcoraz, I
want to watch So those players hold a lot of
power in negotiations overall because also television will listen to
(16:48):
what they're saying too, because it's really important for them.
Speaker 1 (16:51):
So yeah, and I think just to round out the thought,
what they're asking for is a higher percentage of pay
from the Slams, which is we've treated they deserve them.
Is you know the Slams are making more and more money.
It doesn't. It hasn't kept a peace with what the
players are making. They also would like the season to
be shorter. We've talked ad nauseum about that because it's
(17:11):
just such a no brainer. The amount of mandatory events
went from ten to twenty essentially in the last ten years,
and it's crazy. The season is one hundred days to
two hundred plus days.
Speaker 3 (17:20):
Yeah, but you know it's also you don't get to mind.
Speaker 2 (17:22):
It's the tours expect you to play x amount and
then on top of that the Grand Slams. Right, so
you know, if you if the mandatory events are fourteen,
for example, and the wt actually don't know what they are,
I should have. I should know it's sixteen sixteen for
the WTA, so the Slams plus the Slams, so that's
twenty event.
Speaker 3 (17:40):
That's a lot. You might be out there going, no,
it's twenty weeks. No, it's not.
Speaker 2 (17:43):
It's the two weeks of all the w T one
thousands ATP one thousands, few weeks.
Speaker 3 (17:47):
Of the major titles.
Speaker 2 (17:49):
And and look, you know, I know I played on
the tour for twenty two years and it is a long,
long year. But I would argue that it is tougher
and it's more arduous. These matches are longer from the
first to the finals. And if you look at the results,
even this week in Beijing, players are winning a lot,
players are losing a lot, players are pulling out. It's
a very very very very hard twelve month sport. I mean,
(18:11):
really it's eleven months, but it is brutal, and the
amount of travel and time changes and surface changes, and
it's you seeing people lose their minds from time to time,
and Medvedev comes to mind.
Speaker 3 (18:23):
I mean, it's not easy.
Speaker 2 (18:25):
And so that's where the greats really they really do
have my absolute respect, because to do it week in
and week out for ten, fifteen to twenty years is
bloody remind.
Speaker 1 (18:35):
Yeah, And I think if you zoom out and look
at the overall popularity of the sport and how much
it has grown through a couple of these names and
a couple of these big events, you know, I don't
know that the sport has kept a peace. And also
we're not making it easy for new fans. We're not
making it simple for people to participate in watching and
attending and following along. So in addition to pay in
a smallish season that makes more sense and is not
(18:56):
in direct conflict with each other, they also want contributions
to pension, health, maternity benefits, and they want to create
a new player council. Now, I will put this on
the players because I've heard from friends of mine who
work at the PTPA that the players say they want
all these things, but then when it comes time to advocate,
their nowhere to be found. Yeah, that's true, and I
think that that's probably true. You know, obviously they're busy
(19:17):
and it takes time out of their day to go
and do stuff that isn't a brand sponsorship deal or
isn't a recovery from a practice. So I get that
it is a little bit of a zero some game
on their time and resources. That said, you know, if
you want things to be better, you have to participate.
So hopefully this this this letter that they sent the
slams is it looks like from the responses it has
been taken very seriously and also like we want the
(19:39):
sport to be better.
Speaker 2 (19:40):
I think if the I think if the slams and
then may just really smat here, that can really this
can be a quid pro quir This can be like
you scratch my back, ey, scratch youles. Let's let's make
a bit of a supatua. Let's do the right thing
by each other. And you know, get you guys need
to control your players association and in regards to this
as well.
Speaker 3 (19:57):
So I think there's a big opportunity.
Speaker 1 (19:59):
Yeah, I would love.
Speaker 2 (19:59):
I think some like Larry Scott can really make this
happen because he is very smart.
Speaker 1 (20:05):
And I think he understands how the ecosystem works. And
so my hope is that they, yeah, they create a
partnership that is fruitful and then allows for a lot
of the deadweight to be trimmed away.
Speaker 2 (20:17):
Yeah.
Speaker 1 (20:17):
I think that's that's the problem, and nobody wants to
lose their perch. And I think the truth is a
lot of people have to We've talked about this.
Speaker 2 (20:32):
If you say, well, you know, the US Open pay
the winner's five million dollars, I'm like, okay, I get it.
But you do understand someone like Carlis Alcarez can make
a million dollars for one appearance at an exhibition exhibition,
so if he paid seven exhibition nights, he's making seven
million dollars. Okay, So you have to you have to
think about that when you're talking about these top players
(20:53):
and you say, well, you know, the players rank fifty
shouldn't be making that because they can.
Speaker 3 (20:56):
That's not the point.
Speaker 1 (20:57):
I think for most lay people, the idea of making
many millions of dollars, it's crazy. So it's most useful
to couch it as a percentage. If the players are
making three percent of the overall purse and they're providing
more than fifty percent of the value, then yes, something
needs to change. Now I pulled those numbers out of
thin air. But again, percentages, it is hard to fathom
(21:17):
how much more money that the tours are making off
the players, and the players are making off the tours.
Speaker 3 (21:24):
And so for that.
Speaker 1 (21:25):
Reason, you know, it's it's interesting. And again to your point,
it's Jermaine. So because it's Germaine, because we're watching the
Asian Swing, because we have all these amazing matches going on,
and some that have been rife with retirements. Let's talk
about what you've been seeing, because you've been watching more
tennis than I have.
Speaker 3 (21:38):
Yeah, this week has been really fun.
Speaker 2 (21:40):
Actually, I haven't been able to watch a lot live
just because it's in the middle of the night, so
it's been a pain in the ass. So I've watched
a lot of replays and various things like that. But
it was interesting. One of the questions that we were
asking after the US Open was would co cook Off play.
Speaker 3 (21:54):
The Asian Swing?
Speaker 1 (21:55):
Yeah, and she is playing the Asian playing the Asians wing.
Speaker 2 (21:59):
Well, she is battling. Yeah, let me tell you something.
She battled in her first round. She's battled against Belinda
Benchicic today in three sets, lost the first set. Like,
you know, I don't know whether Coco is going to
come out of this year feeling like she can literally
do anything in her life, knowing the obstacles that she's
(22:21):
had to go through with her technique and with the
scrutiny and all of the above.
Speaker 3 (22:27):
But my god, that kid vites.
Speaker 2 (22:28):
Look she battled in this match against Benchic But can
I just say also, in the middle of that match,
the reason why Coco, I think, found her way is
that Belinda Benchicch decided to complain about Coco's team and
how they were clapping and being like, you know, saying
stuff before she was about to serve and stuff, and
(22:49):
she took offense to it. Listen, there was like twelve
people in the stands, and even Coco said that on
the change over, She's like, there's like nobody in the stance.
Speaker 3 (22:57):
So of course they sound a lot.
Speaker 2 (22:59):
Louder than they would if like it's a packed stadium, okay,
because you know, everybody be talking, but because there wasn't
a lot of people in the stands that they obviously
became a little more vocal and Belinda, Belinda took offense
to it and said something to the umpire.
Speaker 3 (23:12):
Look, I can tell you one thing.
Speaker 2 (23:15):
If you're winning a match match and you're in a
winning position, which Bencic was at that point, upper set
and in the second set, you just got to go
and play like you do not want to add fuel
to somebody's fire, particularly someone like Coco, to like get
her in the mindset to like fight and battle, which
she did in that second set and then subsequently went
on to win the match. So I just think, like
(23:36):
it's just crazy that these players like lose their mind
like that, because it's like what I used to say
when people would play against Serena. It's like, don't poke
the bear, Like when you're going to give a player
something to sort of focus on, like, well, if you
I'm gonna like rather than thinking about like I'm sure
Coco was on her own head at that point and
I'm like, god, am I going to lose and blah blah.
(23:57):
Then she's like, uh no, no, now you're disrespecting me
and my team.
Speaker 3 (24:01):
I'm going to focus.
Speaker 2 (24:02):
So I would just say anyone who's playing against the
top player, don't poke the bear and don't poke Cocoa
Golf because she's usually probably one of the most respected
players on tour and she's not going to stand for it,
and she'll stand up for herself and her team. And
so I think that was well done by her. And look,
she went on to win the match. I have to say,
(24:22):
Emma Radakhanu, although she didn't beat Jessica Bagoola, had three
match points to win that match and the tennis was fantastic,
like from the beginning, like Emma has. I think Emma's
gotten so much better with this new coach that she's
had now, week in and week out working on things,
and she's on the cusp of sort of breaking through again.
Speaker 3 (24:42):
I would argue that she's kind of sort.
Speaker 2 (24:44):
Of back as a very as a top twenty player. Yeah,
I feel like she's in the top twenty category now
and I really think that the way she pushed Jesstera
Bagoola and Jessicagoola's back end down the line, can I
just say, if you do have a match point against
her and you had a great shot to her backhand
to cover the back end down the line, because she
hit two back ends on the line on two match
points of the three match points that were unbelievable.
Speaker 3 (25:05):
The first one was a joke.
Speaker 2 (25:06):
I mean, Emma hit the most incredible backhand return cross court.
It was so deep and Jess just you know, got
that left leg down there anchored and just went down
the line with the back end. It was like unbelievable,
and then you thought, I can't get any better than that.
And then another match point, Emma comes in on a
really on you know how I feel about coming in
a cross court foehand severev She goes inside out, hits
(25:27):
a perfect shot but doesn't cover the line and just
just makes it back end down the line again. So
it was great tennis. And then Jess ran away with
the third set. A couple of couple of tough first
games in the set in the third, but you can
imagine that Emma's like just spewing about the three set
match points that she had. But it was great tennis,
and really, I feel like Jess might be really tough
(25:48):
to beat there after that because it's almost like when
you're down match points, you kind of feel like you're
playing with house money, So certainly feel like Jess will
be really hard to beat and Asia swing tends to
be really quick the court.
Speaker 1 (25:58):
Yeah, this suits her does quite a bit. I would
just going back to run and cunning for a second.
I was really thrilled to see how she backed up
Miami on the grass, and she didn't have a great
US Open. She had two very close matches with Sabalanca
over this hardcourt summer series. And I'm hoping for her
that she is a stalwart in the top twenty because
when she plays well and all the scrutiny. Talk about
(26:19):
scrutiny for you know, Coco, all the scrutiny with her
game and her coaching and a da da da da da,
and like, you know, we are really really hard on
players who have reached the heights of the game and
struggled to stay there. That's more true of Emma than
it is of Coco, obviously, But I think.
Speaker 2 (26:33):
You know, look, Katelein, we have to go back and say,
this girl won the US Open, So, like you know,
in the most unbelievable It's like it's like it's a
story that if a movie was made about it, we
as tennis Punnetts would be.
Speaker 1 (26:44):
Like that would never happen, realistic.
Speaker 2 (26:46):
There's no chance someone's coming through qualifying and winning a major.
It's not happening. And she did. So it's like the
most unbelievable fairy tale story arguably in tennis history, what
she did, you know what I mean, it's just like
so it's kind of like, you know, on the men's side,
to say Goran Ivanissovitch winning Wimbledon back in the day,
when you know he cares a word, you know if
you're remember having on the podcast and he talked about
(27:08):
that where he didn't even have enough bloat and shirts
and rackets because no one thought he could get to
the second week and he ends up winning Wimbledon. I mean,
at the same time, this is the guy made the
final a couple of times, so we knew what he
was capable of doing, certainly on grass, and no Emma
Radikano winning the US Open through qualifying is a fairy tale.
Speaker 3 (27:24):
And then you know, having to back it up.
Speaker 2 (27:26):
And she's a beautiful young woman and she's got she's
English and press on her. So I don't know, I
just love her doing well. I love truly and playing
good tennis. I've said this the entirety of the season.
I love her game. Her game to me a game,
I love her game. I think her technique is just
really fun to watch because she takes the ball early.
She's not enormous, but she takes big plays a little
(27:49):
bit like Jeanie Bouchard used to great return on the loan,
right on the line, go for it.
Speaker 1 (27:54):
On the grays forehand.
Speaker 2 (27:55):
I think She's clearly is a much better movie than
Genie was. But but yeah, they remind me a lot
of each other the way they play.
Speaker 1 (28:02):
I think her ball is so clean and I like
the way she constructs points. So for me, watching her
is really fun. She has one of my favorite games
on court. Yeah, and also, like you know, because she
is not unattractive and has a major market behind her
in the form of the UK, Like they always make
sure she has great outfits and you know, like she
she has star quality. I think that's really compelling shot
(28:25):
a way that Jill Schmoller. I mean kudos, because yeah,
she's she comes correct only tournament, so I think the
tour is better with her in it, and I would
agree to me her the complete season she's had from
Miami Sunshine double to you know, grass through now the
hard courts like it's it's been encouraging because I think, again,
one of the things I like so much about tennis
is just the very very very diverse amount of game
(28:48):
styles and backstories and play and all this stuff, and
it really does, you know, I think, lend itself. But yeah,
my hope is Pagola takes this momentum and runs away
with it, because again, the tour is really good when
she's winning big tournaments.
Speaker 2 (29:00):
Yeah, and you know, you would argue that Jess is
sort of coming into her own after a great US
Open where she came so close to making another final,
and and I would argue that Emma, you know, having
her back inside like the top twenty and really pushing
these plays. When I was watching that match, I thought, hmm,
I think Emma Radakanu can make another semi of a Slam, yeah,
and a Major and maybe even a final. She keeps
(29:21):
playing like this because there are a lot of parts
of her game that can get even better. And so
you know, when you've won a major title before, you
know how to do it, so I do. I wouldn't
have said this two years ago that she would make
it back inside the top ten, but I actually do
think she can make it back inside the top ten.
And you know me, Caitlin, I don't say those things.
Speaker 1 (29:37):
No, you don't, you don't.
Speaker 2 (29:38):
Can we just talk about the fact that Medvedev, even
though he's had the worst year of all time, still
refuses to lose Ti Zveref.
Speaker 1 (29:47):
One thing he's not going to do, yeah, is lose
to Alexander Zev. Ever, and said somebody on social media
being like, you know, even when Daniell Medvedev is losing
to taxi drivers and janitors out here, he's still not
going to lose Ta Zverev. And thank you for your service.
This has been a crazy year to watch you play, Donnas.
You'r US Open was insane.
Speaker 2 (30:09):
Your US Open, your US Summer swing was insane, with
the bash, with the I've never seen someone could pitulate
after a loss more than I saw him capitulate in Washington, DC,
where he threw a racket from mid court after losing
the match, arguably on the most crazy match point I
think I've ever seen in my whole entire life. And
(30:29):
that's saying something because I've seen some pretty crazy shit
and then almost pitching it into the crowd and then
literally we've all we've all seen that Satan dry it
the water drop drink bottles you know that are made
of steel, essentially him absolutely crushing two of them. It
was just And then the next week he just walked
(30:50):
off the court and left his rackets. I mean he
was going through a mental breakdown, there's no question. But
sadly for ol many it looked like he's like getting
his shit back together. He's finally worked with a new
coach in Thomas Johansen, which is a great move and
nothing to say anything about his old coach, who I
loved and who had an incredible relationship and run with mehdi,
(31:11):
But it's time you need a new voice, and he's
got a new voice in Thomas Johanssen. So he wins
that match. He looks great, he's got his shit together
and Thomas Johnson Swedish, so he's not going to put
up with all this, you know, absolute nonsense on the court.
But sadly he had to default or quit today against
Leerna Tien. Can we just talk about Learner Tiene? Yeah,
the dude only beats good players. It's crazy.
Speaker 1 (31:32):
I guess if you have to go out and have
a record that's lapseated. You would want to have the
finals a top of Beijing, top ten, you know, sniper status.
Speaker 3 (31:41):
That's unbelievable.
Speaker 1 (31:42):
He loses sometimes bafflingly, but when he wins, he wins big.
Speaker 3 (31:46):
Yeah.
Speaker 2 (31:46):
I mean I'm just good. Good for you, dude. I
mean here he is. Is he in Beijing?
Speaker 1 (31:51):
Is it in Beijing that he been in Darren Beijing? Oh?
Speaker 2 (31:53):
So he's in the finals of Beijing Finals. It's a
ATP five hundred in Beijing. It's not a thousand. That
WTA is a w TA one thousand and in Beijing.
But the guys is a five hundred. But still, it's like,
way to go, dude, No, unbelievable way to go.
Speaker 1 (32:07):
Do you think he gets past center in the final? No,
hard to imagine. You know, he beats he beats group
players when he plays well.
Speaker 3 (32:15):
Here's the thing.
Speaker 2 (32:16):
Yanick lost a set to Alex Deemenor, And I am
so happy for Alex Demonor that he won a set
because that will make him not feel so bad because
every time he plays Janick Cinner he gets crushed.
Speaker 3 (32:28):
It's because I told you.
Speaker 2 (32:29):
I've told you this on the pod everyone, I've never
seen a player play so well and have absolutely zero
chance of beating someone with he stray and open. In
that match that they played, it was like it was
like demon all was playing incredible, wasn't missing a ball
and literally had no chance to win against Yanick. So
it's nice that he got a set, and certainly I
(32:50):
think it will be an incredibly entertaining match with Leon
because he is going to go out.
Speaker 3 (32:54):
They're like, ma fu get and I've got nothing to lose,
and you know what I do. I beat really good players. Sure,
so this will be a test for learners where he
really is at. But there's no.
Speaker 2 (33:02):
Question that Learna ten is a top at least a
top twenty player for sure, no question he can be
in the top ten the way he plays. He is
so good and having Michael Chang now coaching him really
helps him think bigger term, right, And that's the thing
about having these former great players on your bag and
coaching you. If they've done it themselves like Thomas Johansen
(33:22):
has done, like Michael Chang has done, they understand what
to say to you in certain times of a tournament
and a match and after you win matches of how
to prepare you for the next match, and not getting
ahead of yourself and actually saying to you, what do
you mean you don't think you can win this match? Right,
That's where it's important to have somebody around you that
(33:42):
can make you think differently, right, that can make you
think bigger.
Speaker 3 (33:46):
And everyone out there who's listening to this, it's.
Speaker 2 (33:48):
Probably like, well, yeah, you know, you all go to business,
you all go to your jobs, you all have work.
If someone believes in you and tells you what you
can do better and how to get better and what
you can and achieve at.
Speaker 3 (34:01):
Work, you're like, my boss believes in me.
Speaker 2 (34:03):
Yeah, you know, I'm going to put that work in
or maybe I can get that managerial job. Maybe I
can get maybe I can be CEO one day. If
my CEO believes in me. It's the same in tennis.
It's exactly the same in tennis. The lif does wonders.
Speaker 3 (34:16):
Yeah.
Speaker 2 (34:16):
So if when you have somebody that you respect and
look up to tell you those things, man, it makes
the difference. So I think Michael Chang is really helping
him in that regard. It's sort of similar to Conchitita
Martinez when she started working with Miran Dreva. It's like
when you have a great former player who said not
only a great career in tennis herself, but also a
great coaching career and taking people to winning Grand Slams.
You believe them when they tell you that stuff because
(34:39):
you know they're not full of shit, because they're not
going to say It's like if I tell someone they
can be in the top ten, I'm not going to
say that just because you know, I want them to
feel good about themselves. I'm not going to tell them
they can be top ten. I can say they can
be top twenty, and then they go, great, God, you
really believe in me. And then maybe if they get
into the top twenty, you go, you know what, now
that I see it, I think you can be top ten.
So it's you have to have trust in the per
(35:00):
and that you're working with, and so I think Michael
Chang is going to make an incredible difference there.
Speaker 1 (35:03):
So it's fun to see Michael Chang back in the
tennis spear in a big way. Both of us who
grew up playing with his rackets. Yeah, well he was
pump you know, rebuck.
Speaker 3 (35:15):
He was my age.
Speaker 2 (35:16):
So well, the thing I did wear were those Rebuck pumps.
The pumps, so me and Lisa Raymond, we remember we'd
get them and put him on. Lisa Raymond loved those shoes.
She pumped the side of the thing and they would.
Let me tell you something, Rebuck, you should bring those back.
Speaker 1 (35:30):
They should. I know, Rebuk was They kind of tried to,
didn't they They did. I don't know what happened, but
I would love to see them dray again now that
we've got Michael Chang on our screens.
Speaker 3 (35:37):
It was awesome.
Speaker 2 (35:38):
Carlos Alcarez played a match against Casperu the other day.
It was so fun and it was interesting to me
because we talked about it at the US Open. The
way he won that tournament was that he didn't lose
a set basically, right except you know, when he played Yannick,
but like throughout the whole tournament, he didn't.
Speaker 3 (35:53):
Lose the set. He was so focused.
Speaker 2 (35:55):
I think he realized, like, if I'm going to win
these slams against Yannick, I cannot go four or five
sets every single match and have a like little mental
walk about, you know, which he does from time to time.
And it's like, dude, you cannot have mental walkabouts and
go three sets.
Speaker 3 (36:10):
Well he did that against Rude.
Speaker 2 (36:12):
He went into a little bit of la la land
last his opening set and then got his shit together
and one in three sets. But it's interesting when he's
playing best of three and not playing a slam how
he's kind of still has those little mental walkabouts.
Speaker 3 (36:26):
But he got the job done. I love the hair.
I love the hair. Yeah, me too. I'm into it. No,
for sure, I'm into it.
Speaker 1 (36:33):
We have By the way, have we ever figured out
what the tattoo is? Has he ever?
Speaker 2 (36:36):
You haven't seen it yet? No, but I will get
to the bottom of you. I will tell him to
take his shirt off.
Speaker 1 (36:42):
You think it's on his top, buddy.
Speaker 2 (36:43):
I think it's probably on his top, buddy. Okay, I'll
be sure to find out. Don't you worry people, because
that bet that he made about the Brooklyn Bridge was
with me.
Speaker 1 (36:50):
Yeah, no, that's serious.
Speaker 2 (36:52):
Even said it on ESPN's coverage when he said, I
have to get the Brooklyn Bridge because I made a
bet with somebody before the tournament that was with me,
and we have it on film. Go to Tennis channel
looking up all right, guys, Well, eagercon Tech is also
playing great I am.
Speaker 3 (37:07):
I'm super pumped.
Speaker 2 (37:09):
Alcarez beat Taylor Fritz in the final there and straight sets.
Talk about getting your shit together and winning it quickly.
Speaker 3 (37:17):
That was a very quick rump. It was it was,
it was clean.
Speaker 1 (37:22):
I'm excited. What I'm watching in Beijing is I'm watching Evalise.
She's how about that one I've a rebuked to watch.
She's so fast. I watched her a lot at the
US Open because she's you know, they put her on
outside courts because she's not a super big.
Speaker 3 (37:37):
Nice she's not.
Speaker 1 (37:38):
She's fisty and a fader. She's got kind of Pawelini
vibes to me, which is like small, fast and fun,
which is a combo. I like. I'm also watching to
see how chin Wen looks after her well surgery.
Speaker 2 (37:52):
Well, she's had to pull out, which you're saying, like
continually for this reason.
Speaker 1 (37:57):
See how she ends the season, because well, she's always
such a yamic player.
Speaker 3 (38:00):
Three Love and third decided to stop.
Speaker 2 (38:02):
Yeah, probably realize that, you know, maybe it was starting
to hurt her a little bit, and didn't want to
push through it, knowing how important it was not to
do that, but also knowing how important it was to
play in Beijing because it's such a big tournament for
her and for her Chinese fans.
Speaker 3 (38:15):
And for the w t A Tour.
Speaker 2 (38:18):
So it's nice to searr out then competing and clearly
you know, but that's where you once it gets to
a point where you're like, am I gonna? Am I
going to go back three months here if I keep
continuing to play this match. So I'm sure it was
incredibly hard. But we have seen a lot of pullouts
in this tournament, like walkovers and people quitting in the
middle of matches, which again goes back to our original conversation,
(38:39):
which is about fucking we need some re hard Yeah,
it's not we need to reform the tennis world. Now
that there's all these new fans and everyone has, you know,
a stake in the game, let's let's get you know,
let's make the best possible product. The best possible product
is not an unfocused, unwieldy, injury plagued circus that can't
(39:01):
It's kind of like the w NBA, and you know
how I'd love to bring a little WNBA, but it's
the same as WNBA.
Speaker 3 (39:06):
There's so many injuries this year, and.
Speaker 2 (39:09):
It's because the schedule is so unbelievably condensed and brutal
and physical, just like tennis a little bit different.
Speaker 3 (39:16):
You can't hit your tennis opponent. If you do, you're
out of there.
Speaker 2 (39:19):
But my point is physicality as in running and hitting,
and it's hard and these a lot of top players
are getting into visicalia Caitlin Clark like it's happening on
the regular basis. So like tennis and like the WNBA,
it's like the bigger and more popular and more money
that's going to these athletes. You have to take care
of them better, you know, because if they're not there,
(39:40):
that is a problem. And so yes, I think what
we talked about at the start of this pot is
super important and that's where that's where we need to
be better of protecting them and taking care of them.
And this is where an opportunity with the players and
the majors and the heads of the tours need to
recognize they need to change something.
Speaker 1 (40:02):
Yeah, well, hopefully a lawsuit will do that. We'll do that.
Speaker 3 (40:04):
Law suit can change a lot of things.
Speaker 1 (40:06):
Can All right, let's wrap it up and see how
our favorites fare in another week or so. As we
look to the end of the season. Thanks so much
for having me over. Hey, you're welcome after it's all
Popular Podcasts
On Purpose with Jay Shetty
I’m Jay Shetty host of On Purpose the worlds #1 Mental Health podcast and I’m so grateful you found us. I started this podcast 5 years ago to invite you into conversations and workshops that are designed to help make you happier, healthier and more healed. I believe that when you (yes you) feel seen, heard and understood you’re able to deal with relationship struggles, work challenges and life’s ups and downs with more ease and grace. I interview experts, celebrities, thought leaders and athletes so that we can grow our mindset, build better habits and uncover a side of them we’ve never seen before. New episodes every Monday and Friday. Your support means the world to me and I don’t take it for granted — click the follow button and leave a review to help us spread the love with On Purpose. I can’t wait for you to listen to your first or 500th episode!
Crime Junkie
Does hearing about a true crime case always leave you scouring the internet for the truth behind the story? Dive into your next mystery with Crime Junkie. Every Monday, join your host Ashley Flowers as she unravels all the details of infamous and underreported true crime cases with her best friend Brit Prawat. From cold cases to missing persons and heroes in our community who seek justice, Crime Junkie is your destination for theories and stories you won’t hear anywhere else. Whether you're a seasoned true crime enthusiast or new to the genre, you'll find yourself on the edge of your seat awaiting a new episode every Monday. If you can never get enough true crime... Congratulations, you’ve found your people. Follow to join a community of Crime Junkies! Crime Junkie is presented by audiochuck Media Company.
Cardiac Cowboys
The heart was always off-limits to surgeons. Cutting into it spelled instant death for the patient. That is, until a ragtag group of doctors scattered across the Midwest and Texas decided to throw out the rule book. Working in makeshift laboratories and home garages, using medical devices made from scavenged machine parts and beer tubes, these men and women invented the field of open heart surgery. Odds are, someone you know is alive because of them. So why has history left them behind? Presented by Chris Pine, CARDIAC COWBOYS tells the gripping true story behind the birth of heart surgery, and the young, Greatest Generation doctors who made it happen. For years, they competed and feuded, racing to be the first, the best, and the most prolific. Some appeared on the cover of Time Magazine, operated on kings and advised presidents. Others ended up disgraced, penniless, and convicted of felonies. Together, they ignited a revolution in medicine, and changed the world.