April 28, 2025 • 46 mins
Electronic line calls gone wrong! Claylor Fritz! Chipotle Stadium! Coco love disguised as harsh coaching! All the clay season drama coming out of Madrid is fair game—but conspiracy theories about rigged draws is where we draw the line. Plus: Coaches corner with some interesting staff changes and updates from across the spectrum, from Dinara Safina to Patrick Mouratoglou.
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 (00:14):
One two, one two. All right, we're getting it started.
We are Hello, everybody, Welcome to the Rene Stubs Tennis Podcast.
We are actually at my apartment, but we decided to
take it outside because it is so beautiful here in
New York today. It's about what seventy three degrees sunny,
not a cloud in the sky, and I know how
much that makes Caitlin very happy.
Speaker 2 (00:36):
Go Nay's outside. We decided, like you know, when you
show up to class and you convince your professor to
have class outside, that's what we're doing. We're having class outside.
Speaker 1 (00:47):
We have some very interesting and fun things to talk
about going into the end of Madrid. It hasn't finished yet,
and it's going to be prolonged even more because today
literally the power went out. Can we talk about this
for a second.
Speaker 2 (01:03):
It is so bonkers that in Spain and Portugal they
just had like widespread I mean, I remember this happened
in Naples a couple of years ago. Obviously, like you know,
this doesn't happened infrequently in some birds of the world,
but during a major one thousand tournament in the capital
of a European nation, not you could have seen that
kind not one nation do, but do newe eddos it does,
(01:29):
it's bananas. My favorite quote about this power outage, yeah
uh was Coca asked about what happened who she had
finished her match thankfully, but she said, no power where
the showers are? So I'm about to go take a
shower and I'll let you all know how it goes.
Speaker 1 (01:46):
Have we heard from her since I don't know, Well,
she did post Signs of Life, so I think she did.
Speaker 2 (01:50):
Did Cocoa make it out of the showers?
Speaker 1 (01:52):
Yes, Coco let us know. But speaking of Coco playing great,
playing great, found her form, you know, But also she
did this last week as well. You know, she was
looking pretty good early, so you know. And look, a
lot of people probably don't like the fact that I'm
not hard on her, but I'm always sort of pointing
(02:13):
out when things go badly. And the only reason for
that is because I want her to win so badly.
I want her to do well every week because I
think she's so good for the game. Her positivity and
women's tenters is great, and so it's always really hard
to watch her sort of lose, but not lose in
the way that you know, she lost certain matches in
the past where it's been a great, terrific match and
(02:35):
you know, someone's just been a little bit better on
certain aspects. But sort of the things that fall apart
the double faults in the forehands sort of really plague
her in the last couple of matches that she's lost.
So I just want her to get through a tournament,
whether it's winning or losing the tournament, just having the
weaker side of her game sort of stand up a
little bit and have someone just beat her outright just
being a little bit better. Yeah, which is a rarity
(02:56):
because when she's hitting the forehand in and she's moving
the way she was, like, for example, today, she looked
great today. I mean she wasn't making any errors. Benchic
had no Like Benchic relies on you making errors because
she sort of like takes the ball so early and
redirects the ball so beautifully and doesn't make a lot
of mistakes herself, but doesn't have a lot of power.
So when you're playing against someone like Coco, you do
(03:17):
have to win us and if you're not really pressing her,
you kind of toast. And we saw that today beautifully.
Speaker 2 (03:22):
The way I take your critiques of Cocoa Gough because
this is certain that you described how I feel as well,
which is you want to root for the kid. And
so when I hear you talk about some of the shortcomings,
it is as a coach. You talk about Coco as
a coach, especially because when she has a lot of
matches on her racket and there's something technical, there's something
(03:43):
that's a shortcoming that can be worked on that's impossible
for you to not point out. Yeah right, I mean
it's like you're a doctor and you see a broken but.
Speaker 1 (03:53):
Well you fixed that. How many times have you heard
people go, well, I was doing a TV show today
and somebody actually wrote me and said, I have a
nodule on my neck. And that's happened where people have
actually discovered cancers or things like this because people have
actually written to them.
Speaker 2 (04:04):
Doctor Renee is in the building.
Speaker 1 (04:05):
I am definitely not a doctor. Do not come to
me for a nodule. Take that somewhere else. But yeah,
I do. I come from a coaching standpoint. I come
from a place that you know, I would like to
see certain things change in her game. But then again,
I'm not there and I don't know the work that
she's putting in day in and day out, and I'm
sure that they're putting in the work that's necessary for her.
(04:27):
So I want to see her have the results because
of that, because I know she works really hard on it.
Speaker 2 (04:31):
Let me ask you and other women's match a woman
we've not talked about all that much, but somebody I've
always really enjoyed playing and who's had some you know,
playing ups and downs. Maria Sachari. Yeah, she's had a
good couple of matches. She'd beat Paulini in the latest round.
(04:51):
You know, she's somebody who has been a top ten player,
back with her old coach, back with their old coach.
What do you make of that? I mean, she's somebody
for whom you know, it's sort of bath what has
happened to her on court? For a lot of us
who like your game or like your speed. You know,
she's just losing a lot of winnable matches. I'd love
to see her string it together. And as a coach,
what would you say, you know is what you're seeing?
Speaker 1 (05:14):
Yeah, I think just a comfort level being back with Tom.
I think that really does make a difference. She doesn't
have to prove anything to him or he's not going
to change anything. He's going to go back to sort
of the things that worked with him before. With her,
she's comfortable with that. She's comfortable with him, and I
do think that matters. So when she's out there playing
on the court, for example, she's not thinking, oh God,
we know we should have been Oh I don't know
(05:36):
if I should have worked on that, And it's just
like this, Really it can work one way where it
can have really quick success with a new fresh eyes
sort of helping you get through a match or get
through changing things, and you're excited about it, and you
look at the results that a lot of players have had,
like Peyton Sterns' is with a new coach, and she
was with Tom and she was not having a good
couple of months, and now she's again playing quite well
(05:58):
with a new set of eyes telling me what to
do didn't obviously work with Tom. And then Tom's found
himself maybe out of a job, and then Marie is like, Okay,
come back to me, because clearly you and I would
you know, doing quite well together. So it's it is
an interesting sort of juxtaposition with with what happened sometimes
in the coaching world.
Speaker 2 (06:18):
I got to asked somebody by somebody a couple of
days ago actually with regards to coaching changes, which is,
how do we feel about Patrick Moradiglu coaching Name Osaka?
And as you know, for for those of you who
followed the name Osaka situation, obviously she's not found the
kind of results coming back from motherhood that you know,
(06:39):
it's hard to expect just because you know, you miss
a step and all of a sudden it's uh, fitness
and mental and all this stuff. You know, this is
not her favorite part of the year anyway, No, but
she has although she almost beat Eager last year. Remember
in Paris last year, Oh my god, I totally forgot
about it. In her early rounds she.
Speaker 1 (06:56):
Was literally the only one that pushed it. Well.
Speaker 2 (06:58):
Moveoever had a pretty good fun descent Fannet. But yeah,
Patrick Moradiglu Naomi Osaka. She's posted about it, saying that
she likes his positivity and he helps her believe in herself.
But also, you know, which is all well and good,
but also if the results aren't coming, it's kind of like,
well great, but but what now?
Speaker 1 (07:19):
I don't know honestly how long he'll put up with it.
As well. You know, he likes success, right, and so
that's another interesting juxtaposition because yes, Naomi Osaka is a
massive game name in the sport of tennis and clearly
in the sport in the sport world. Yeah, a lot
of people have heard of Naomi Osaka. So you just
wonder how long he's going to sort of deal with
(07:41):
that as well, and how long she'll deal with it.
I mean, she has all the money in the world.
She never has to work another day in her life.
How much does someone like her want to put herself
through this consistently on a weekly basis where she's not
having results clearly, as you already pointed out, you know,
clay has never been her thing. So maybe she's hoping
to get some kind of confidence going into the hardcore,
(08:01):
but still grass is not really her thing. Like how
much can she It's going to be a while before
she gets back at her whole tournament this week, coming
into this week, which is interesting to see if she
can get some confidence. I don't know how much Patrick Adam,
you know, influence on her to do that. I think
it's a smart thing because she's playing against players that
are nowhere near as good as her going into a
smaller tournament, so hopefully she can get a little bit
(08:22):
of confidence there. We know that she can play well
on clay because she pushed Eager. Yeah, you know, arguably
the greatest player we've seen on clay in the last
five years on the women's to her. So yeah, so
it's just be continued to be.
Speaker 2 (08:35):
Continued on that. But it is interesting. People really do
have questions and want to understand a lot of the coaching.
You know, a lot of the coaching changes. I've been
asked questions before like do you think it's good the
coaches are my do you think it's interesting that we
focus on coaches? And my answer is yes, the more
interesting stories, the more interesting you know, ways to understand
what's going on on and off court, the better you know.
(08:57):
And sometimes we've had obviously tragic conversations which I think
we're about to get tun us a little bit where
some of the stuff that goes on with the coaching.
Speaker 1 (09:05):
Is is uh under.
Speaker 2 (09:07):
Intense scrutiny for good reason, Like with Elena Rebekna.
Speaker 1 (09:10):
Yeah, interesting with Elena going down to Switzerlina this week.
I mean Switzelena hasn't lost a match on Clay this year. Now, boy,
I tell you, you know, there's players that you root for,
Like Maddy Keys was that player that everyone sort of
rooted for and hoped won a Grand Slam in her
career because she was arguably the best player that hasn't
won a Grand Slam. Not that on her list anymore.
(09:32):
That is gone. She is finally won one. I would
argue that the next best player to not win a
Grand Slam without question is Elena Switzerlina, Elena Switzelena for sure,
you don't you disagree.
Speaker 2 (09:44):
I just don't like her.
Speaker 1 (09:45):
So I'm trying to say, what do you mean you
don't like her? Why not? We're gonna is Ukraine gonna
hate us?
Speaker 2 (09:50):
Now? I hope not. But I also just I don't.
I don't love her game. I'd never have. I guess
she's a good mover. You know, she's got interesting uh
you know, counterpuntic skill. I like her off court, you know,
gay On Manfis is one of the best fun personalities
that's ever played on ante piture. I just don't particularly
like her very much. So I'm trying to separate my own,
(10:10):
but you need to separate. I don't like her very
much with I don't like her tennis. I'm trying to
separate that from your assertion, which is, is she the
best player active who has not won a Slam? And
maybe maybe no, without.
Speaker 1 (10:24):
Questions, she is the best player that on the tour
currently that has not won a Grand Slam. This is
somebody who's won. I mean, she won the tour finaleen
dozen tournaments, She's won the WTA finals, She's been in,
you know, so many latter parts of Grand Slam. She's
beaten every single player that's won a Grand Slam over
the last five to ten years. She's beaten them all.
Speaker 2 (10:44):
So certainly by record, you're making a compelling case. I
think Macova's game is vastly superior to her.
Speaker 1 (10:49):
Yeah, but Mokhovah has not had the same. If I
had to peak a career to have, there's no doubt
I would take Suzelene's over Muhovah's at this present.
Speaker 2 (10:57):
If I had to pick a tennis game to have
me too, I would pick mc Yeah.
Speaker 1 (11:02):
So we're not talking about from that person.
Speaker 2 (11:04):
Well, I'm challenging the framework of your question, which is, is
she the best player to not have one a Slam?
By record? Yes, by gamestyle. I would say, now she's
a pusher essentially, Well, I mean it wasn't the Aki
was a yeah, not won how it.
Speaker 1 (11:18):
Was technically a pusher. I mean, I wouldn't call either
of them pushes. I would say they are counter punchers.
There's a difference between being a pusher and.
Speaker 2 (11:24):
I'm using the words entertaining.
Speaker 1 (11:26):
You're going back to your junior days when you're having
tortures the counterpunches.
Speaker 2 (11:30):
I have a hard time appreciating their Gamestyale, So I
think that's I'm trying. I am trying to answer your
question as objectively as I can by setting aside my
bias and accounting for it.
Speaker 1 (11:40):
Your bias is showing through tremendous Well, that's why I'm
acknowledged serve and volleyer and attacker and I was too.
But I can also appreciate players that literally don't miss,
and to me, someone like Lena Switzelena deserves to it.
I really hope she wins a Grand Slam, and I
think she can, but it has to come in the
next year or two. I think her biggest fall was
the at Wimbledon when she lost. I believe it was
(12:05):
in the semi finals. Was that to wondrosover that year
or was that in that We'll have to figure that out.
But I remember seeing her after that match and she
was devastated.
Speaker 2 (12:14):
Is that the match she lost to was that?
Speaker 1 (12:15):
Maybe she was up? I don't know if somebody's going
to write to.
Speaker 2 (12:20):
Player not too rich to well, I've been in two
slim finals, she should have won one of them.
Speaker 1 (12:27):
Well, Mouhovah's been in one slam final and a semi.
I would say that's yeah. Again, we're talking about the
last ten years of a career, and I think that
for me, Switzlina is that player. Listen, we can argue forever,
and we might and we we shall. Let's talk a
(12:50):
little bit about the fact that Rebakina did lose that
match to Switzerlina and her fitness trainer that used to
be with her, who I believe may have been a
lot of the reason that the WTA knew a lot
of information because he left the camp and you just
wonder he was very close proximity to her and how
much you know, discussions would he have had with the
(13:12):
WTA maybe in the future. And I'm going to go
over to mir Andreva. You know why because mirror. Andreva
is coached by whom can Chechen Martinez, and you know
who used to coach Carolina Pushkova, China Martinez, and you
know who used to be Carolina Pushkov's fitness trainer, Zula.
So he has gone from putting the puzzle to pushover
(13:32):
to Rabakina and now to Andreva. And for me, one
of the reasons why I don't think Rabarkinas having the
success that she's been having in the past is because
she's not moving as well. And I think he was
a big part of that. And I don't see her
moving as well. I see her the confidence level is
not there on her Suitelena is the type of player
(13:54):
that makes you play a lot of balls and if
you don't hit winners on her, you're not gonna win
because she's not going to miss. And that's what we saw.
And Bakina as well as not serving you off the
court like she used to. Yeah, that first streake is
really what her game was rely and frankly, in Madrid,
where it's a little bit of altitude, the serve does work.
It's why Covidiva one there one year big striking tennis.
(14:17):
So if you're serving well, you're going to do well,
and so it's a to be scene with Rebuccina how
she handles going onto the grass, because clearly we know
how well she can play at Wimbledon, but there is
a lot of question marks there. We know with the
coaching situation, we know with the training situation, like everything
has changed for her. She didn't look super happy on
the court. I worry for her like I always have.
(14:39):
I've always had a soft spot for her because I
think she's a great kid. I just think she's been
led astray with with this whole coaching situation. I have
been asked by a few people on Twitter today about
the coaching situation of we're seeing more women and we
are seeing Dinara Safina was going to bring that coming
back into the picture with Diana Schneider.
Speaker 2 (15:01):
I love that Russian as well, Russian Lady Kamba, Russian
Lady Combo. Dinara Safina, one of the greatest players ever
on tour to never win a.
Speaker 1 (15:10):
Slam, never win a Slam, got to number one in
the world Spetlana Kuznetsova in the final of the French
Open in two thousand and nine, the year that Sam
Stoza made the Semis and lost to speed Line in
three sets. That's how I know that. And Dinara was
a number one player in the world at the time.
So this is a really interesting little add on. Of
course her brother that happened. Did they do it too far?
(15:30):
Did they say, hey, listen, if you're going to go,
I'm going to coach. I don't know. It's kind of funny.
I love it. And she's still in the tournament and
she now goes up again.
Speaker 2 (15:42):
For those of you who are wondering who Diana Schneider is,
because she's not somebody we're talking about on the the
part very much. She is a Russian tennis player who
played college tennis at NC State University, a lefty, and
she kind of exploded under the tour. She wears that
Babushka head rag, which I know she's gotten rid of it.
She was wearing the Babushka head rag which Madrid and
(16:04):
she is now playing.
Speaker 1 (16:07):
That's it. I think that's going to be an interesting match.
It's just supposed to be played and over with now.
But because the lights went out in Spain, they did
not play. The lights went out in Spain, which I thought,
but it is nice to see. So I'm answering one
of the two of the questions that were sent to
me on Twitter on the socials. I do love the
(16:28):
fact that there are a few more women starting to
get there, you know, themselves back on the tour as
a coach, and that makes me happy because we can
relate to you, guys. We can relate to you, and
I think that's one of the reasons why Sakary is
doing better again with Tom is that she's comfortable with him.
And I do think that women are more comfortable with women.
Look at Andrevel with Kanchi.
Speaker 2 (16:48):
I don't know that it's always a gender issue, but
I definitely can say, having had lots of men coaches
and lots of female coaches, the approach to athletes is
almost uh metrically opposed. And again I'm speaking of my
own experience, probably having twenty coaches. You know, the men
typically are much more critical, they're much harsher. They have,
(17:11):
at least at the time, really sort of coached with
the methodology that you know, men get motivated by anger
and fear and anxiety and women get motivated by positivity
and encouragement. I don't know anybody who would prefer to
be motivated by anger and anxiety. But also, you know,
I definitely know that the female coaches I had were
(17:32):
vastly different in their approach and it was a lot
more of a collaboration, and so maybe there are some
gender components of this, which is why I'm always really
happy even when it happens. You know, Emily Maresmo was
obviously coaching Andy Murray, but also coached Luca Pully, another
French person. Like just this idea that like there's not
a the female coaching perspective can really be super additive,
(17:53):
which is why I keep hoping that you coach a dude.
Speaker 1 (17:55):
Yeah, I would like to coach a guy. Actually, I
think you know who I have one for you. I
feel like, Sasha, are you saying.
Speaker 2 (18:00):
Felix, because when I saw him lose to Surrenderlo, who
you know does a good player?
Speaker 1 (18:06):
Dude? I've never seen a worse serve on a dude
in my life that Felix. The guy looks like he's
about to trip over.
Speaker 2 (18:11):
I care so much about Surrenderlo, but why is Felix
losing matches that are winnable? And that's kind of been
happening for the last couple weeks.
Speaker 1 (18:19):
Have many a theory of Felix. I will keep it
to myself because we know that these stupid websites that
take one line out of what I say on a
podcast and make it a fucking headline. And as Petko
always says, fuck you for doing that. But I have
a few theories. I will say one that I just
think he needs to relax a little bit, Like I
really do think he's so uptight sometimes and I would
(18:42):
love to see him be a little bit more free
flowing and use his athleticism differently. And yeah, there's a
few things about him.
Speaker 2 (18:47):
He's such a beautiful mover, and he's such a he's
got theoretically like a nice game. He kind of prowls
around the court like cat. But he's so tense.
Speaker 1 (18:56):
He's so tense, you can I just I just want
to yeah, things of a like to do.
Speaker 2 (19:00):
It, but anyways of people that you should go.
Speaker 1 (19:03):
One thing that I do want to discuss, and I
was watching Madrid today before the lights went out, and
did we didn't need the lights because we have the sun.
These tennis facilities that build these fucking stadiums, okay, where
they have roofs or things that go over it and
don't think about the sun. And it was also asked
of me on Twitter. It was one of the things
(19:23):
that was asked to me about Madrid's tournament, possibly knowing
what a horrible viewing experience the shadows make during the day.
Sid thanks for the question, but it was actually on
my list to talk about. It's so annoying you cannot
watch the tennis on television. It's like the US Open.
The US Open has less bad shadows, it absolutely does.
But the issue remains, which is I think it's a
(19:47):
the Caja Mahica, the Magic Bucks as it's known in
UH Center Stadium, and you know what Andi Roddict used
to call it, the Chipotle Stadium. Chipotlet way felt like
a Chipotle in there. It's so hideously ugly.
Speaker 2 (20:01):
Not only not only the shadows, which are terrible, I
think the way that they've built the roof is such
that it obviously only has a tiny, tiny part of
the sunshine in which is why the shadows migrate across
the court during an afternoon match, which is a terrible
viewing experience. Certainly, in UH is there a way to
build a roof that's like see through glass probably. I mean,
(20:22):
look at Louis Armstrong Stadium. That's a real testament to
how great a stadium can be built. Even wait, did
you just say, oh, Louis Armstrong just one of the
world stadiums in the world, is also a terrible stadium,
not only because of the shadows, but the way that
those boxes are set up that people look like they're
sitting in a.
Speaker 1 (20:41):
Chipotle d m V. Like, wait, next time you ever
woke into Chipotle, which I never delayed better looking than Chipotle.
Speaker 2 (20:48):
It's terrible, as me guess and my bloating, and it's
last week you made everyone listen to peeing. Let's just
keep it PG. I just think architecturally Spain has some
of the most amazing, especially Madrid. What on earth were
you thinking? Have we done that this is the main
stadium for the main tournament?
Speaker 1 (21:07):
Did they not know that the sun goes east to
west and this is how it's set up? So dumb
it's done such a bad experience on television to.
Speaker 2 (21:16):
Watch, to have to watch, which is why I again say,
if you're gonna do it, just bring back to Blue Clay.
But what I would love to see, especially because we
hear it's for sale. Is whoever buys Madrid next moves
it out of does something, does something different, moves it
out of the the Chipotlai Stadium. Yeah, it's a beautiful stadium.
Speaker 1 (21:36):
But I mean as far as like size and everything
and that, Yeah, it's the facilities.
Speaker 2 (21:40):
It's an incredibly important sporting nation. Spain has contributed. They're
they've over indexed given how small a country are there,
and they're kind of like the checks. It's like, yeah,
they're you know, some of the greatest places in the
world have come from there and their marquee tournament is
its yeah.
Speaker 1 (22:24):
For me, Okay, later, let's talk about the biggest story.
One of the biggest stories, of course from the Vitria
is our friend Alex Zverev, who we have clearly talked
about quite at nauseum through the years. But he was correct.
He was correct in this situation. This ball was so
far out that he took a photo of it and
put it up on Twitter and an Instagram for the
world to see how far this ball was out. As
(22:46):
soon as the ball bounced, it was I'm sitting there,
I'm like, yeah, the ball's out, and I was like,
wait a second, what now I want to set this up, okay,
because it was a it was a very big point
in the match. He was he'd lost the first set.
He was trying to get.
Speaker 2 (22:57):
Back in again and Salad a sperious.
Speaker 1 (23:01):
Player in Spain. Not an easy task and he's such
a good player. And this ball was out. It was
clearly out. The ballmark showed out. There was no other
ballmark around. Sometimes you can get the ballmarks confused, no
other ballmark around, and he's begging the umpire to get
out of the chair, which he knows he can't do.
So I guess the question is can we have the
umpires get out of the chair? No, because you know,
(23:22):
like the ATP and WT have said, like if we
start doing that, for one, everyone's going to want you
to jump out of the chair because there has been
Evelise also took a photo. Hers was a little bit
more ambiguous. I wouldn't say for sure that ball was out, but.
Speaker 2 (23:36):
Helenka took a photo the other day of a ball
that was clearly touching the line.
Speaker 1 (23:43):
Yeah.
Speaker 2 (23:43):
I mean, I think what we're actually talking about is
does electronic line calling on clay work. There has been
a lot of controversy about this because unlike hard courts,
unlike grass courts where the lines are painted on the
ballmark of clay skids, it tends to move, and for
(24:06):
whatever reason, it's way, way, way more open to interpretation.
And I suspect what happened here is the same way
that the ball machine, the ballmark machine, would be off
by I don't know, an inch in every direction. It's
taking away line space on one side and giving it
in line space on the other. I'm not an engineer.
(24:26):
I don't know, but it does raise a pretty creatical issue,
which is like, how could this egregious of a of
a call be made?
Speaker 1 (24:35):
I don't know.
Speaker 2 (24:35):
I don't know what the answer is. I will say this,
I don't miss the days where they came down and
like just sort of I will say I balled it.
That wasn't good TV and didn't seem that convincing when
the line judges did look at it.
Speaker 1 (24:45):
People can argue with me on this issue, and there
is no blanket statement on this, but the one blanket
statement I will make as a forma player and somebody
that had good eyes I did. I did. I made
from pretty good line calls when we had the electronic
line calling and we had to challenge and things like that.
It's a bit of a joke with the umpires. Humans
(25:07):
make mistakes all the time. Line calls are often wrong
from time to time on in matches, umpires make really
bad calls when they come down and they look at
a ballmark. I've had it happen to me many times
where I'm like, what the fuck are you looking at?
I am looking at the same mark as you, and
you're saying it's out and I'm saying it's in vice versa. Right,
(25:28):
you can have that argument all day long. This was
an absolute, pure mistake by the machine that guess what
happens all the time in the human world. Now here's
the thing. That same mistake or that same call might
happen to your opponent the next game, right, So you
know in a lot of ways that electronic line call
(25:49):
is going to fuck it up, maybe the same way
the next time around. So it's even Stevens whereas a
human might interpret it one way or the other, and
might I don't know. I wouldn't say that they like
a player more than the other. So maybe you know
a Roger Federer is going to get a call a
little bit more over, some guy who's a qualifier. Could
it happen? Probably has it happened.
Speaker 2 (26:07):
One hundred percent anytime there's subjectivity involved, subjective stuff gone.
Speaker 1 (26:11):
On, would I have lost my mind? As of o
Zverev apps fucking lutely. But the difference is that it's
not a human error. It's a calibrations issue probably with
the machine that they can fix, and it's going to
happen to your opponent more than likely in the same match.
So I am a little bit less pissed off at
the electronic line calling in general, because I just feel
(26:33):
like it's there's no human error on that, and I
feel like it's happened through the years so many times
with human error that I preferred this. It wasn't a mistake. Absolutely,
Could he go on about it. He did, and he
had every right too, because the boar was definitely out.
But I just feel like electronic line calling for me,
will always be the best way to call balls, agree,
(26:55):
period and a story. So whether it got it wrong,
it did, but they can calibrate it and move on,
whereas with a human error, you know, you see it
all the time, then the umpires get a little bit unsure.
The linesmen get a little bit panicky. They start making
How many times you see a linesman make a mistake
and then two games later that same guy makes the
same mistake, and then you finally like you look over
there as a player and you're like, oh, he's gone.
(27:15):
They just get rid of him, yeah, you know, and
then they replace. I don't miss that. I don't miss
that at all. That's why I like the electronic line calling.
Somebody else asked me a question about any more thoughts
on updated news on the US so mixed doubles our
top players embracing the idea of playing. Yes, they are.
Speaker 2 (27:30):
Remind us what the structure is for a mixed doubles,
because I think it's exciting.
Speaker 1 (27:36):
Well, instead of playing in the second week, which is
when you start playing mix, usually by the end of
the first week, oh usually Thursday, maybe of the first week,
you start playing mix, and it's just a little bit
too much of a grind for the singles great singles
plays to play singles doubles or even singles and mixed.
Particularly the guy's playing best of five. So they decided
to play the mixed doubles before the US Open starts.
(27:56):
In the qualifying week fan week, so it's fan week,
which listen, I'm okay with that. I'm okay with that
because I think it's a great because it gets packed
in qualifying week, it's packed now it's become a real
thing to go to. It's like free tickets basically, so
you're going to get great atmosphere out there, which I like.
And as a player that played you know, singles, doubles
and mixed and then predominantly doubles and mixed in the
(28:19):
latter part of my career where I had my success,
it would have been nice to have those crowds all
the time. And they do love the doubles and mixed
because most players that are recreational players play doubles and
mixed doubles, so I think they get a great bang
for their buck that week. The one problem I have
with it is this best first of four sets that
I hate. I am hearing there's a lot of top
players that are going to play a lot great and
(28:42):
so I think that's great because it's good for them
because they're getting matches before the tournament starts in singles.
So it's a it's a really interesting concept and idea,
and I don't dislike it. My issue is the first
to four, first to four. They're playing first to four games.
Speaker 2 (28:57):
It's just four games, Yeah, that's the match or what's
the point of that.
Speaker 1 (29:02):
They want the sets to be quicker? Okay, so I
think it's best of three sets, first of four games,
okay to win the set. So I forgets the three
all I guess they're playing a tie break. That's what
I'm hearing.
Speaker 2 (29:12):
And wasn't there something interesting about the qualification, like who
gets to be a team? Aren't they prioritizing singles singles
ranking the doubles rankings? So it does.
Speaker 1 (29:22):
If you're number one in doubles and your number one
is singles, your number one, and then you add who
you're playing with.
Speaker 2 (29:28):
So like a player such as Bethany Maddox Sands who
plays a lot of mixed doubles but does not play
singles well, and.
Speaker 1 (29:34):
He's not a great example right now because her ranking
is so low in doubles, I think she's dropped down.
Speaker 2 (29:39):
Question.
Speaker 1 (29:40):
Let's say a daniel A Nicole Mellica who's a top
the top twenty in the world. Now, might she miss
out playing with somebody twenty in the world in doubles.
If two players in the singles or every singles player
top twenty plays, yeah, she will miss out.
Speaker 2 (29:57):
So yeah, so there are some winners and losers, which
kind of what I was getting at. Yeah, but you're
okay with that.
Speaker 1 (30:02):
I like, I'm not against the week before. I think
it will be a great event, but I'm just against
the scoring system. That's I love.
Speaker 2 (30:09):
Really, I love doubles, and I love the idea that
the fans will get something up close and personal. And
you know what, I have my own very sort of
proto fascist way of dealing with making doubles and mixed
doubles popular. But I think people watching it is a
good thing, and I like the idea that the US
Open is is experimenting there.
Speaker 1 (30:30):
It's it's a malleable situation. We'll see how it goes,
and if it's a success, then we might see a
few other Grand Slams. But you do have some insight
in for that the top players. I'm hearing a lot
of top players are going to play, so it'll be
a lot of fun for the Carlitos now Carlitos Coco,
that'll be great. Just put it out there, or Carlos
and Emma Radicano, Carlos RADICANU just lost a joke. We
(30:52):
did get asked a very interesting but also a bit
of a ridiculous question. What do you think about the
apparent rigged or algorithm driven draws in the WTA? What
you make it? The same matchups over and over, Coco
benchic Eger and noscover mate. Let me just say, Paolo Paola,
Paola Castro, that's not it doesn't happen. Are it's cooled? Lot?
Speaker 2 (31:13):
Are people? Is this a conversation that people have?
Speaker 1 (31:15):
Let me tell you how this works?
Speaker 2 (31:16):
But wait, wait, wait is it? I just want to
understand the premise of the question. I do are people
on the internet saying that draws are rigged?
Speaker 1 (31:22):
Well, some people do think that. Some people do think that.
Speaker 2 (31:25):
And let me just have you ever in your thirty
plus years and the tennis who are ever seen or
heard anything that would indicate like, hey, actually this so
and so needs to move to this right?
Speaker 1 (31:37):
No? No, like this is this is what happens the
four seeds or actually sometimes.
Speaker 2 (31:46):
Twenty four seeds.
Speaker 1 (31:48):
Hole please, okay, So what happens is sometimes they do
it electronically or they just put it in the machine
like at the Grand slams now and they just pop
it out right. But like on the WTA Tour for example,
often not always, but most of the time, you'd literally
put two like what do you call them ping pong bars? Yeah,
(32:10):
ping pong balls, or you know, I don't even know
what you call them chips like with the number on it,
one or two, like a casino chip. Yeah, you put
the casino chip and you put one is always on top,
two is always on the bottom, right, then you put
What happens is you put three and four into a
bag and then you have somebody a player. They asked
(32:31):
players to come in, and most players like, fuck no,
I'm not doing the drawer. Like people run away from
the day because they don't want to have anything to
do with it. They're like, no, I don't want to.
I don't want to know who's in the.
Speaker 2 (32:39):
Drawer because you would know, because you would know the drawer.
I feel it could be fun.
Speaker 1 (32:43):
You get to sometimes the random doubles player will be like,
I'll do it because they know. They're like, yeah, let
me do it, right. So you go in and you
literally put your hand in the bag and pull out
a number and if three comes out, three goes to
the top, so three ghosts to the bottom of the
top half of the drawer.
Speaker 2 (32:58):
The seeds being placed is just and then four just
gets put on top right of the bottom half of
the drawer, which is why, unfortunately, over the last few
Grand Slams we've seen like Sinner and Alcarez be put
on the same side of the drawer because Sinner's one
and Alcarez keeps being fucking three. Yeah, so there's two
things that it seems like we need to address here
with Pola's question number one. And it's unclear whether Paula
(33:21):
understands this or not, but in case anybody doesn't, seeds
get placed. Seeds getting placed is based on ranking, with
the exception of Wimbledon, who places their own seeds best seeds,
grass or.
Speaker 1 (33:31):
Performance, but seeds get ranked, So three and four are
always top or bottom. And then it goes five, six, seven,
and eight get put into it again into a bag
and you pull out. Whatever number gets pulled out gets
placed on the top of the quarter final section up
the top right. So that's how it goes. So you
put four in and they get drawn out independently and
(33:52):
they go into the thirty spots in the drawer.
Speaker 2 (33:54):
Anybody doesn't know every tournament from your local, you know, community,
to USDA juniors to international tournaments to Grand Slams. Placing
seeds is part of it because you protect and give
advantages to the people who have a ranking or a
preferred status. That's why you want to be seen, which
is why you want to be seated, which is why
the rankings do matter. And then everybody else is just
(34:15):
the draw.
Speaker 1 (34:16):
Then what happens is once the seeds get picked, literally
every other little chip goes into the bag and you
just pull and you pull and you pull.
Speaker 2 (34:23):
And this is either happening literally or metaphorically with a computer.
But either way, I have never seen there's no any
And if people keep playing each other time and time
and time again, maybe they're Maybe it's fate, Paula, did
you think about that.
Speaker 1 (34:35):
Yeah, it's fate. And it's it is funny how you
can play on tour for like ten fifteen years and
never have played one certain person and then you're playing
or are you playing one person all the time. It
happens all the time, all the time. Yeah, but it's random,
it's totally roundom it's just unless you're in finals every week,
luck case, or you're going to clear everybody. Yeah, like
eagishron Tech, Yeah, is going to be in a lot
of matches because she's in a lot of swindler. No,
(34:57):
it's a joke about Egan Ostapenko. Keith Onland asked what
is causing all the ups and down play? Basically one
wins a one thousand and goes out first round. I
mean talking about Anissimova, Jack Draper, of course, Ostapenko recently
wasn't one thing.
Speaker 2 (35:11):
That's just tennis.
Speaker 1 (35:12):
That's just tennis.
Speaker 2 (35:13):
Man.
Speaker 1 (35:13):
It's hard to back it up. Sunshine double is really
hard to do. No one's ever, not very many people
have done it. Anissimova, of course, you know, had a
terrific win over in the Middle East, and then she's
gone up and down with some injuries. Ostapenko plays indoors,
very different surface, very different conditions, goes to Madrid, losers,
it's altitude, it's very different, completely probably different balls. It's
(35:37):
really hard to win and do back to back.
Speaker 2 (35:39):
Also, like you're you know, at the end of the day,
you're talking about a bunch of human beings. Like I
think when people and this is sort of. We've been
talking about this a lot in my household because of
the basketball players that are going on. As much as
they try to ignore the basketball playoffs, can't help but
talk about basketball around this time, especially if the next
you're still in at which my wife is very thrilled
that they are so like, you know, because.
Speaker 1 (36:00):
Man, I got so lucky yesterday. That was such a foul.
That was such a foul.
Speaker 2 (36:04):
They should not have won yesterday's game. But the better
teams on average win more because they play best of,
best of, best of, and the you know, in a
lot of these team sports, you know, the better teams
usually do win. What's fun about tennis is like sometimes
the better player loses. Sometimes the player who wins more
of the total points still loses. Sometimes the player who
(36:25):
shouldn't have a shot because of something that's gone on,
you know, in an individual sport, like the results results
can vary. And I think that's like, to me, such
a that's such an ad But I also get that people,
you know, you just have to learn a lot of
new names and just get excited, which.
Speaker 1 (36:38):
Brings me to the next question. High on Tennis do
a deep dive about the climate, surface and which players
have more of an advantage over the others. So that's
an interesting way to think about it. And I do
want to get to Novak after this question, because usually
most players that are sort of malleable on all surfaces,
I would say sable Anca eager to a certain degree,
(36:58):
and the men's game obviously through the years, Roger Rafa,
they adapt and they're so.
Speaker 2 (37:04):
Good, and that's what makes them good.
Speaker 1 (37:05):
And that's what makes them so good.
Speaker 2 (37:07):
Anybody can play well on their favorite surface on a
great day when they're feeling great. But the champions figure
out how altitude, ball, surface conditions, mental stuff. They bring
it all the time.
Speaker 1 (37:18):
Yeah, and you know, it just depends on the way
you hit the ball. Do you slide well on clay,
do you move well on grass? I mean, Roger's perfect example,
and Novaka being able to move on all surfaces. They've
adapted on all surfaces. Serena adapted to all surfaces. Her
serve was so big she could win so many free
points on any surface at any time.
Speaker 2 (37:38):
I think about that a lot when it comes to
Sablanca and Serena, which is just some players have such
an imposing game that they can make I mean yes,
they are also making adjustments. But Sabalanca is playing an
offensive game as is you know, Serena Williams on every
surface regardless of you know, but players who are a
little bit more CounterPunch oriented have to do something different.
Speaker 1 (38:01):
Yeah, they have to adapt a little bit more exact
in some ways. In others they don't miss a lot.
So you still have to beat them. You have to
hit the winners against them, a Switzlena for example, or
it was Niyaki or a hallop. You know, they're gonna
run you down. They're gonna run balls down. They're gonna
make you come forward on a fast court, and if
you're not willing to come in and be aggressive, you're
gonna lose against a play like that if you play
them on clay.
Speaker 2 (38:23):
I do think it is worth mentioning.
Speaker 1 (38:24):
Though.
Speaker 2 (38:24):
One of the things that I don't love about the
surface conversation in today's tennis is just how same a
lot of the surfaces have become. Because it used to
be very play was slower, grass was faster. There used
to be a regular amount of tournaments on carpet, Like
imagine if there was a carpet slam. I loved stephie
(38:44):
Graff would never have lost.
Speaker 1 (38:46):
A match on.
Speaker 2 (38:48):
Martinez. She loved exactly fast courts. And so for me,
the results of yesteryear where you see a Richard Krachek
in a late stage of a grass tournament or the
bear cetags and you know, Spanish clear court specialists and
Thomas Muster and stuff, they're less so because the game
has optimized so much for this kind of I think samness, Yeah,
(39:08):
which is not you know, it's not a critique so
much is just I missed the random, you know, like,
well it's clay season and let's see if someone are
random is going to win the friends chibn Yeah, and
they probably not going to have add a lot of
the time.
Speaker 1 (39:19):
A question that was posed to me about Nolay, about
Novak's body language and press conference quotes and tactical issues,
et cetera. We talked about this last week, Caitlin. He's
on the worry index. He's still on the worry index.
And I'll tell you why. And I don't know if
I told you did I tell you this story about
his interview that I did with him a couple of
years ago, and that year, so when we talked about
it right, And there was something about the way he
(39:39):
answered that that it triggered something in me that went, oh, oh,
I think he's kind of sort of over this a
little bit, and not like overplaying and over the notoriety
and over the clap you know, of the crowd. And
I mean, the thing that's really hard to let go
of as a tennis player, especially someone so great as him,
is the adulation and the love of what the people
(40:02):
are getting from you, which is unreal tennis. Like, my god,
there's nothing better than winning a twenty five ball rally
and sliding and you know, hustling and grinding and winning
that point and having that adulation. Oh my god, there's
nothing like it. It's like legal addiction.
Speaker 2 (40:18):
Right.
Speaker 1 (40:20):
But at some point, your age catches up with you.
The grind catches up with you, the packing your bags
catches up with you, the being away from your family
catches up with you, and at some point that shifts
your mindset a little bit. In the grinding moments in
matches of eh, do I do I really want to
(40:41):
like hang in there today? Do I really want to
like run that one ball down today? And your mind
is saying yes, But your entirety of your mindset and
body and practice and your thought process. More importantly, your
thought process is not locked in. Do you and I
just think he's lost his locked inness?
Speaker 2 (41:00):
Do you think given that we've compared a lot of
this year's nola to last year's nolay where he seemed
not bothered by losing a lot, and his his in retrospect,
his crystal clear focus.
Speaker 1 (41:15):
On was the Olympics.
Speaker 2 (41:16):
The Olympic title that had eluded him felt like a
foregone conclusion, Like he was like, Okay, well, I kind
of don't care how this year goes, because I have
one goal and I've accomplished all the other ones, and
I'm going to make sure that this one goes. Do
you think it's different from this year? From what you've seen?
Speaker 1 (41:32):
The thing that I think is different this year is
that he was absolutely, as you said, singlely focused on
winning a goal, and he talked about at most obvious
and he played so freakin' well. And I think there's
a little bit of a flame that was distinguished. Boom,
after that was done. It was extinguished, thank you, It
was just extinguished. It was gone. Yes, it was like, okay,
(41:54):
what do I have to prove now zero, he has
nothing to prove. The only thing he has left, and
it's the only thing he talks about, is winning one
more Grand Slam, to have twenty five Grand Slams and
have the absolute ultimate record.
Speaker 2 (42:06):
I mean, he already has a record, Margaret Courts record
is not real.
Speaker 1 (42:09):
Well we know this, but yeah, Serena really really wanted
twenty five, you know, but she didn't get it. And
does it define her, No, of course not. She's still
the greatest female player of all time, you know, and
arguably the greatest player of all time. Novak now is
sitting in that same spot, and I think the only
thing that drives him is maybe winning one more And
I could see him literally doing Pete Sampras and dropping
(42:30):
the mic and being like, I'm done. But having said that, Caitlin,
it's not that easy to win a Grand Slam anymore
when you're not even winning fucking matches at regular tournaments
in best of three sets against these guys. Come on,
do you think if he were going to win one
more Wimbledon Wimbledon? I think so. I think the clay
He sort of said it in the press conference. He's like,
(42:52):
you know, I'm hoping to obviously do well in France.
I don't know Verbet and what he said, but it
was sort of insinuated. Eh. I know I'm not playing
well enough on clay, but you know, he knows how
good it is on grass. He's a best grasscore player
and Wembledon champion over the last fifteen years. And the
guy that's beaten him twice in two finals is still there.
(43:13):
So is he going to get past him? I don't know,
but he's probably hoping that he has a great day
again like he did at the Olympics last year. And
maybe maybe maybe, But I don't care who you are.
When the plaque starts getting on the brain and you're
not winning those matches, it gets harder and harder.
Speaker 2 (43:28):
Yeah, one week's time will be the beginning of REALM
brings back with it Yannick center Chao yah, Nick Yannick.
Let's see what that ends up being. There's already a
lot of press. He's gotten some shoutouts in Berg today.
Everyone's sort of allies on. I mean, thankfully he's back, Like, honestly,
you're excited for me to be back.
Speaker 1 (43:47):
I'm happy he's back. It's shit that he was put
away for three months because come on, you guys know
how I feel about it.
Speaker 2 (43:55):
We've talked about that before. But what we have not
yet talked about, which I would like to but I
am not yet prepared, is I think we should talk
about the Carlos Alcoraz documentary.
Speaker 1 (44:04):
I have not seen it yet, but you will. I
will watch it. We did get asked about it on
Twitter on socials about what I thought about it, but
I haven't seen it.
Speaker 2 (44:14):
I would love for us to have a discussion involving
the audience. So if you watch it, okay and you
have thoughts, questions, follow ups, concerns.
Speaker 1 (44:24):
Some people have written me about it, so I'll put
a little list together.
Speaker 2 (44:27):
Let's make a list and we'll do a Madrid rap
Italy preview and a Carlos Alcarez documentary. What I've seen
looks exciting. I'm excited to watch it. It looks interesting. Netflix
Spain did it.
Speaker 1 (44:37):
Yeah, it'll be interesting, and that's one of the that's
interesting of the Madrid on them, which is interesting.
Speaker 2 (44:43):
Yes, Netflix Spain having done this as opposed to Netflix US.
Netflix US did breakpoint, and I suspect there's probably a
little bit of a directional artistic difference.
Speaker 1 (44:54):
Oh interesting, Okayflis.
Speaker 2 (44:57):
Did an Argentina documentary a couple next with Netflix. Argentina
did a documentary a couple of years ago about the
famous tennis player who never got to number one, who
maybe should have from Argentina, and it was it was
better than I can't remember his name, which is why
I'm not mentioning it. But it was better than things
that I've seen out of Netflix US always like Yama villasms.
(45:18):
Oh wow, he never got to number one, right wow?
He was like Ruffa before Ruffa. Right, so he was
just good on stories that are not so obvious. I
think maybe Netflix US, certainly the Box of Box production
was super corporate and not very good.
Speaker 1 (45:30):
So maybe this will be well, we'll see, we will cry.
I know there's a lot more questions. I'll get to
you back to you Ale on socials and answer them
as much as I can, but we've only got so
much time to talk about stuff. Who do you think
Caitlin before you leave is going to win Madrid Men's
and Women's.
Speaker 2 (45:46):
Why don't we just go with Coco go off? Oh well,
I kind of love for Coco to win it. Okay,
all right, Coco and Men's. I am tempted to say
something kind of crazy. Both of these would be crazy.
So I'm going to take as my answer, what about
Kaylor Fritz klalor Fritz.
Speaker 1 (46:04):
I don't think I don't think that's a bad choice. Actually, there,
Madrid is a good, big service. Do well. No Carlos
because he pulled out right because of the injury. Hopefully
he's okay going into Fritz. I've got two Americans. I'm
just gonna leave it with that.
Speaker 2 (46:21):
I'm not going to say all right, I'm not going
to say, well, see how I said back, see how
you did.
Speaker 1 (46:28):
But anyway, all right, everyone, thanks for joining us today
on the outskirts of my apartment. We have been enjoying
the sun.
Speaker 2 (46:36):
Bye bye,
One two, one two. All right, we're getting it started.
We are Hello, everybody, Welcome to the Rene Stubs Tennis Podcast.
We are actually at my apartment, but we decided to
take it outside because it is so beautiful here in
New York today. It's about what seventy three degrees sunny,
not a cloud in the sky, and I know how
much that makes Caitlin very happy.
Speaker 2 (00:36):
Go Nay's outside. We decided, like you know, when you
show up to class and you convince your professor to
have class outside, that's what we're doing. We're having class outside.
Speaker 1 (00:47):
We have some very interesting and fun things to talk
about going into the end of Madrid. It hasn't finished yet,
and it's going to be prolonged even more because today
literally the power went out. Can we talk about this
for a second.
Speaker 2 (01:03):
It is so bonkers that in Spain and Portugal they
just had like widespread I mean, I remember this happened
in Naples a couple of years ago. Obviously, like you know,
this doesn't happened infrequently in some birds of the world,
but during a major one thousand tournament in the capital
of a European nation, not you could have seen that
kind not one nation do, but do newe eddos it does,
(01:29):
it's bananas. My favorite quote about this power outage, yeah
uh was Coca asked about what happened who she had
finished her match thankfully, but she said, no power where
the showers are? So I'm about to go take a
shower and I'll let you all know how it goes.
Speaker 1 (01:46):
Have we heard from her since I don't know, Well,
she did post Signs of Life, so I think she did.
Speaker 2 (01:50):
Did Cocoa make it out of the showers?
Speaker 1 (01:52):
Yes, Coco let us know. But speaking of Coco playing great,
playing great, found her form, you know, But also she
did this last week as well. You know, she was
looking pretty good early, so you know. And look, a
lot of people probably don't like the fact that I'm
not hard on her, but I'm always sort of pointing
(02:13):
out when things go badly. And the only reason for
that is because I want her to win so badly.
I want her to do well every week because I
think she's so good for the game. Her positivity and
women's tenters is great, and so it's always really hard
to watch her sort of lose, but not lose in
the way that you know, she lost certain matches in
the past where it's been a great, terrific match and
(02:35):
you know, someone's just been a little bit better on
certain aspects. But sort of the things that fall apart
the double faults in the forehands sort of really plague
her in the last couple of matches that she's lost.
So I just want her to get through a tournament,
whether it's winning or losing the tournament, just having the
weaker side of her game sort of stand up a
little bit and have someone just beat her outright just
being a little bit better. Yeah, which is a rarity
(02:56):
because when she's hitting the forehand in and she's moving
the way she was, like, for example, today, she looked
great today. I mean she wasn't making any errors. Benchic
had no Like Benchic relies on you making errors because
she sort of like takes the ball so early and
redirects the ball so beautifully and doesn't make a lot
of mistakes herself, but doesn't have a lot of power.
So when you're playing against someone like Coco, you do
(03:17):
have to win us and if you're not really pressing her,
you kind of toast. And we saw that today beautifully.
Speaker 2 (03:22):
The way I take your critiques of Cocoa Gough because
this is certain that you described how I feel as well,
which is you want to root for the kid. And
so when I hear you talk about some of the shortcomings,
it is as a coach. You talk about Coco as
a coach, especially because when she has a lot of
matches on her racket and there's something technical, there's something
(03:43):
that's a shortcoming that can be worked on that's impossible
for you to not point out. Yeah right, I mean
it's like you're a doctor and you see a broken but.
Speaker 1 (03:53):
Well you fixed that. How many times have you heard
people go, well, I was doing a TV show today
and somebody actually wrote me and said, I have a
nodule on my neck. And that's happened where people have
actually discovered cancers or things like this because people have
actually written to them.
Speaker 2 (04:04):
Doctor Renee is in the building.
Speaker 1 (04:05):
I am definitely not a doctor. Do not come to
me for a nodule. Take that somewhere else. But yeah,
I do. I come from a coaching standpoint. I come
from a place that you know, I would like to
see certain things change in her game. But then again,
I'm not there and I don't know the work that
she's putting in day in and day out, and I'm
sure that they're putting in the work that's necessary for her.
(04:27):
So I want to see her have the results because
of that, because I know she works really hard on it.
Speaker 2 (04:31):
Let me ask you and other women's match a woman
we've not talked about all that much, but somebody I've
always really enjoyed playing and who's had some you know,
playing ups and downs. Maria Sachari. Yeah, she's had a
good couple of matches. She'd beat Paulini in the latest round.
(04:51):
You know, she's somebody who has been a top ten player,
back with her old coach, back with their old coach.
What do you make of that? I mean, she's somebody
for whom you know, it's sort of bath what has
happened to her on court? For a lot of us
who like your game or like your speed. You know,
she's just losing a lot of winnable matches. I'd love
to see her string it together. And as a coach,
what would you say, you know is what you're seeing?
Speaker 1 (05:14):
Yeah, I think just a comfort level being back with Tom.
I think that really does make a difference. She doesn't
have to prove anything to him or he's not going
to change anything. He's going to go back to sort
of the things that worked with him before. With her,
she's comfortable with that. She's comfortable with him, and I
do think that matters. So when she's out there playing
on the court, for example, she's not thinking, oh God,
we know we should have been Oh I don't know
(05:36):
if I should have worked on that, And it's just
like this, Really it can work one way where it
can have really quick success with a new fresh eyes
sort of helping you get through a match or get
through changing things, and you're excited about it, and you
look at the results that a lot of players have had,
like Peyton Sterns' is with a new coach, and she
was with Tom and she was not having a good
couple of months, and now she's again playing quite well
(05:58):
with a new set of eyes telling me what to
do didn't obviously work with Tom. And then Tom's found
himself maybe out of a job, and then Marie is like, Okay,
come back to me, because clearly you and I would
you know, doing quite well together. So it's it is
an interesting sort of juxtaposition with with what happened sometimes
in the coaching world.
Speaker 2 (06:18):
I got to asked somebody by somebody a couple of
days ago actually with regards to coaching changes, which is,
how do we feel about Patrick Moradiglu coaching Name Osaka?
And as you know, for for those of you who
followed the name Osaka situation, obviously she's not found the
kind of results coming back from motherhood that you know,
(06:39):
it's hard to expect just because you know, you miss
a step and all of a sudden it's uh, fitness
and mental and all this stuff. You know, this is
not her favorite part of the year anyway, No, but
she has although she almost beat Eager last year. Remember
in Paris last year, Oh my god, I totally forgot
about it. In her early rounds she.
Speaker 1 (06:56):
Was literally the only one that pushed it. Well.
Speaker 2 (06:58):
Moveoever had a pretty good fun descent Fannet. But yeah,
Patrick Moradiglu Naomi Osaka. She's posted about it, saying that
she likes his positivity and he helps her believe in herself.
But also, you know, which is all well and good,
but also if the results aren't coming, it's kind of like,
well great, but but what now?
Speaker 1 (07:19):
I don't know honestly how long he'll put up with it.
As well. You know, he likes success, right, and so
that's another interesting juxtaposition because yes, Naomi Osaka is a
massive game name in the sport of tennis and clearly
in the sport in the sport world. Yeah, a lot
of people have heard of Naomi Osaka. So you just
wonder how long he's going to sort of deal with
(07:41):
that as well, and how long she'll deal with it.
I mean, she has all the money in the world.
She never has to work another day in her life.
How much does someone like her want to put herself
through this consistently on a weekly basis where she's not
having results clearly, as you already pointed out, you know,
clay has never been her thing. So maybe she's hoping
to get some kind of confidence going into the hardcore,
(08:01):
but still grass is not really her thing. Like how
much can she It's going to be a while before
she gets back at her whole tournament this week, coming
into this week, which is interesting to see if she
can get some confidence. I don't know how much Patrick Adam,
you know, influence on her to do that. I think
it's a smart thing because she's playing against players that
are nowhere near as good as her going into a
smaller tournament, so hopefully she can get a little bit
(08:22):
of confidence there. We know that she can play well
on clay because she pushed Eager. Yeah, you know, arguably
the greatest player we've seen on clay in the last
five years on the women's to her. So yeah, so
it's just be continued to be.
Speaker 2 (08:35):
Continued on that. But it is interesting. People really do
have questions and want to understand a lot of the coaching.
You know, a lot of the coaching changes. I've been
asked questions before like do you think it's good the
coaches are my do you think it's interesting that we
focus on coaches? And my answer is yes, the more
interesting stories, the more interesting you know, ways to understand
what's going on on and off court, the better you know.
(08:57):
And sometimes we've had obviously tragic conversations which I think
we're about to get tun us a little bit where
some of the stuff that goes on with the coaching.
Speaker 1 (09:05):
Is is uh under.
Speaker 2 (09:07):
Intense scrutiny for good reason, Like with Elena Rebekna.
Speaker 1 (09:10):
Yeah, interesting with Elena going down to Switzerlina this week.
I mean Switzelena hasn't lost a match on Clay this year. Now, boy,
I tell you, you know, there's players that you root for,
Like Maddy Keys was that player that everyone sort of
rooted for and hoped won a Grand Slam in her
career because she was arguably the best player that hasn't
won a Grand Slam. Not that on her list anymore.
(09:32):
That is gone. She is finally won one. I would
argue that the next best player to not win a
Grand Slam without question is Elena Switzerlina, Elena Switzelena for sure,
you don't you disagree.
Speaker 2 (09:44):
I just don't like her.
Speaker 1 (09:45):
So I'm trying to say, what do you mean you
don't like her? Why not? We're gonna is Ukraine gonna
hate us?
Speaker 2 (09:50):
Now? I hope not. But I also just I don't.
I don't love her game. I'd never have. I guess
she's a good mover. You know, she's got interesting uh
you know, counterpuntic skill. I like her off court, you know,
gay On Manfis is one of the best fun personalities
that's ever played on ante piture. I just don't particularly
like her very much. So I'm trying to separate my own,
(10:10):
but you need to separate. I don't like her very
much with I don't like her tennis. I'm trying to
separate that from your assertion, which is, is she the
best player active who has not won a Slam? And
maybe maybe no, without.
Speaker 1 (10:24):
Questions, she is the best player that on the tour
currently that has not won a Grand Slam. This is
somebody who's won. I mean, she won the tour finaleen
dozen tournaments, She's won the WTA finals, She's been in,
you know, so many latter parts of Grand Slam. She's
beaten every single player that's won a Grand Slam over
the last five to ten years. She's beaten them all.
Speaker 2 (10:44):
So certainly by record, you're making a compelling case. I
think Macova's game is vastly superior to her.
Speaker 1 (10:49):
Yeah, but Mokhovah has not had the same. If I
had to peak a career to have, there's no doubt
I would take Suzelene's over Muhovah's at this present.
Speaker 2 (10:57):
If I had to pick a tennis game to have
me too, I would pick mc Yeah.
Speaker 1 (11:02):
So we're not talking about from that person.
Speaker 2 (11:04):
Well, I'm challenging the framework of your question, which is, is
she the best player to not have one a Slam?
By record? Yes, by gamestyle. I would say, now she's
a pusher essentially, Well, I mean it wasn't the Aki
was a yeah, not won how it.
Speaker 1 (11:18):
Was technically a pusher. I mean, I wouldn't call either
of them pushes. I would say they are counter punchers.
There's a difference between being a pusher and.
Speaker 2 (11:24):
I'm using the words entertaining.
Speaker 1 (11:26):
You're going back to your junior days when you're having
tortures the counterpunches.
Speaker 2 (11:30):
I have a hard time appreciating their Gamestyale, So I
think that's I'm trying. I am trying to answer your
question as objectively as I can by setting aside my
bias and accounting for it.
Speaker 1 (11:40):
Your bias is showing through tremendous Well, that's why I'm
acknowledged serve and volleyer and attacker and I was too.
But I can also appreciate players that literally don't miss,
and to me, someone like Lena Switzelena deserves to it.
I really hope she wins a Grand Slam, and I
think she can, but it has to come in the
next year or two. I think her biggest fall was
the at Wimbledon when she lost. I believe it was
(12:05):
in the semi finals. Was that to wondrosover that year
or was that in that We'll have to figure that out.
But I remember seeing her after that match and she
was devastated.
Speaker 2 (12:14):
Is that the match she lost to was that?
Speaker 1 (12:15):
Maybe she was up? I don't know if somebody's going
to write to.
Speaker 2 (12:20):
Player not too rich to well, I've been in two
slim finals, she should have won one of them.
Speaker 1 (12:27):
Well, Mouhovah's been in one slam final and a semi.
I would say that's yeah. Again, we're talking about the
last ten years of a career, and I think that
for me, Switzlina is that player. Listen, we can argue forever,
and we might and we we shall. Let's talk a
(12:50):
little bit about the fact that Rebakina did lose that
match to Switzerlina and her fitness trainer that used to
be with her, who I believe may have been a
lot of the reason that the WTA knew a lot
of information because he left the camp and you just
wonder he was very close proximity to her and how
much you know, discussions would he have had with the
(13:12):
WTA maybe in the future. And I'm going to go
over to mir Andreva. You know why because mirror. Andreva
is coached by whom can Chechen Martinez, and you know
who used to coach Carolina Pushkova, China Martinez, and you
know who used to be Carolina Pushkov's fitness trainer, Zula.
So he has gone from putting the puzzle to pushover
(13:32):
to Rabakina and now to Andreva. And for me, one
of the reasons why I don't think Rabarkinas having the
success that she's been having in the past is because
she's not moving as well. And I think he was
a big part of that. And I don't see her
moving as well. I see her the confidence level is
not there on her Suitelena is the type of player
(13:54):
that makes you play a lot of balls and if
you don't hit winners on her, you're not gonna win
because she's not going to miss. And that's what we saw.
And Bakina as well as not serving you off the
court like she used to. Yeah, that first streake is
really what her game was rely and frankly, in Madrid,
where it's a little bit of altitude, the serve does work.
It's why Covidiva one there one year big striking tennis.
(14:17):
So if you're serving well, you're going to do well,
and so it's a to be scene with Rebuccina how
she handles going onto the grass, because clearly we know
how well she can play at Wimbledon, but there is
a lot of question marks there. We know with the
coaching situation, we know with the training situation, like everything
has changed for her. She didn't look super happy on
the court. I worry for her like I always have.
(14:39):
I've always had a soft spot for her because I
think she's a great kid. I just think she's been
led astray with with this whole coaching situation. I have
been asked by a few people on Twitter today about
the coaching situation of we're seeing more women and we
are seeing Dinara Safina was going to bring that coming
back into the picture with Diana Schneider.
Speaker 2 (15:01):
I love that Russian as well, Russian Lady Kamba, Russian
Lady Combo. Dinara Safina, one of the greatest players ever
on tour to never win a.
Speaker 1 (15:10):
Slam, never win a Slam, got to number one in
the world Spetlana Kuznetsova in the final of the French
Open in two thousand and nine, the year that Sam
Stoza made the Semis and lost to speed Line in
three sets. That's how I know that. And Dinara was
a number one player in the world at the time.
So this is a really interesting little add on. Of
course her brother that happened. Did they do it too far?
(15:30):
Did they say, hey, listen, if you're going to go,
I'm going to coach. I don't know. It's kind of funny.
I love it. And she's still in the tournament and
she now goes up again.
Speaker 2 (15:42):
For those of you who are wondering who Diana Schneider is,
because she's not somebody we're talking about on the the
part very much. She is a Russian tennis player who
played college tennis at NC State University, a lefty, and
she kind of exploded under the tour. She wears that
Babushka head rag, which I know she's gotten rid of it.
She was wearing the Babushka head rag which Madrid and
(16:04):
she is now playing.
Speaker 1 (16:07):
That's it. I think that's going to be an interesting match.
It's just supposed to be played and over with now.
But because the lights went out in Spain, they did
not play. The lights went out in Spain, which I thought,
but it is nice to see. So I'm answering one
of the two of the questions that were sent to
me on Twitter on the socials. I do love the
(16:28):
fact that there are a few more women starting to
get there, you know, themselves back on the tour as
a coach, and that makes me happy because we can
relate to you, guys. We can relate to you, and
I think that's one of the reasons why Sakary is
doing better again with Tom is that she's comfortable with him.
And I do think that women are more comfortable with women.
Look at Andrevel with Kanchi.
Speaker 2 (16:48):
I don't know that it's always a gender issue, but
I definitely can say, having had lots of men coaches
and lots of female coaches, the approach to athletes is
almost uh metrically opposed. And again I'm speaking of my
own experience, probably having twenty coaches. You know, the men
typically are much more critical, they're much harsher. They have,
(17:11):
at least at the time, really sort of coached with
the methodology that you know, men get motivated by anger
and fear and anxiety and women get motivated by positivity
and encouragement. I don't know anybody who would prefer to
be motivated by anger and anxiety. But also, you know,
I definitely know that the female coaches I had were
(17:32):
vastly different in their approach and it was a lot
more of a collaboration, and so maybe there are some
gender components of this, which is why I'm always really
happy even when it happens. You know, Emily Maresmo was
obviously coaching Andy Murray, but also coached Luca Pully, another
French person. Like just this idea that like there's not
a the female coaching perspective can really be super additive,
(17:53):
which is why I keep hoping that you coach a dude.
Speaker 1 (17:55):
Yeah, I would like to coach a guy. Actually, I
think you know who I have one for you. I
feel like, Sasha, are you saying.
Speaker 2 (18:00):
Felix, because when I saw him lose to Surrenderlo, who
you know does a good player?
Speaker 1 (18:06):
Dude? I've never seen a worse serve on a dude
in my life that Felix. The guy looks like he's
about to trip over.
Speaker 2 (18:11):
I care so much about Surrenderlo, but why is Felix
losing matches that are winnable? And that's kind of been
happening for the last couple weeks.
Speaker 1 (18:19):
Have many a theory of Felix. I will keep it
to myself because we know that these stupid websites that
take one line out of what I say on a
podcast and make it a fucking headline. And as Petko
always says, fuck you for doing that. But I have
a few theories. I will say one that I just
think he needs to relax a little bit, Like I
really do think he's so uptight sometimes and I would
(18:42):
love to see him be a little bit more free
flowing and use his athleticism differently. And yeah, there's a
few things about him.
Speaker 2 (18:47):
He's such a beautiful mover, and he's such a he's
got theoretically like a nice game. He kind of prowls
around the court like cat. But he's so tense.
Speaker 1 (18:56):
He's so tense, you can I just I just want
to yeah, things of a like to do.
Speaker 2 (19:00):
It, but anyways of people that you should go.
Speaker 1 (19:03):
One thing that I do want to discuss, and I
was watching Madrid today before the lights went out, and
did we didn't need the lights because we have the sun.
These tennis facilities that build these fucking stadiums, okay, where
they have roofs or things that go over it and
don't think about the sun. And it was also asked
of me on Twitter. It was one of the things
(19:23):
that was asked to me about Madrid's tournament, possibly knowing
what a horrible viewing experience the shadows make during the day.
Sid thanks for the question, but it was actually on
my list to talk about. It's so annoying you cannot
watch the tennis on television. It's like the US Open.
The US Open has less bad shadows, it absolutely does.
But the issue remains, which is I think it's a
(19:47):
the Caja Mahica, the Magic Bucks as it's known in
UH Center Stadium, and you know what Andi Roddict used
to call it, the Chipotle Stadium. Chipotlet way felt like
a Chipotle in there. It's so hideously ugly.
Speaker 2 (20:01):
Not only not only the shadows, which are terrible, I
think the way that they've built the roof is such
that it obviously only has a tiny, tiny part of
the sunshine in which is why the shadows migrate across
the court during an afternoon match, which is a terrible
viewing experience. Certainly, in UH is there a way to
build a roof that's like see through glass probably. I mean,
(20:22):
look at Louis Armstrong Stadium. That's a real testament to
how great a stadium can be built. Even wait, did
you just say, oh, Louis Armstrong just one of the
world stadiums in the world, is also a terrible stadium,
not only because of the shadows, but the way that
those boxes are set up that people look like they're
sitting in a.
Speaker 1 (20:41):
Chipotle d m V. Like, wait, next time you ever
woke into Chipotle, which I never delayed better looking than Chipotle.
Speaker 2 (20:48):
It's terrible, as me guess and my bloating, and it's
last week you made everyone listen to peeing. Let's just
keep it PG. I just think architecturally Spain has some
of the most amazing, especially Madrid. What on earth were
you thinking? Have we done that this is the main
stadium for the main tournament?
Speaker 1 (21:07):
Did they not know that the sun goes east to
west and this is how it's set up? So dumb
it's done such a bad experience on television to.
Speaker 2 (21:16):
Watch, to have to watch, which is why I again say,
if you're gonna do it, just bring back to Blue Clay.
But what I would love to see, especially because we
hear it's for sale. Is whoever buys Madrid next moves
it out of does something, does something different, moves it
out of the the Chipotlai Stadium. Yeah, it's a beautiful stadium.
Speaker 1 (21:36):
But I mean as far as like size and everything
and that, Yeah, it's the facilities.
Speaker 2 (21:40):
It's an incredibly important sporting nation. Spain has contributed. They're
they've over indexed given how small a country are there,
and they're kind of like the checks. It's like, yeah,
they're you know, some of the greatest places in the
world have come from there and their marquee tournament is
its yeah.
Speaker 1 (22:24):
For me, Okay, later, let's talk about the biggest story.
One of the biggest stories, of course from the Vitria
is our friend Alex Zverev, who we have clearly talked
about quite at nauseum through the years. But he was correct.
He was correct in this situation. This ball was so
far out that he took a photo of it and
put it up on Twitter and an Instagram for the
world to see how far this ball was out. As
(22:46):
soon as the ball bounced, it was I'm sitting there,
I'm like, yeah, the ball's out, and I was like,
wait a second, what now I want to set this up, okay,
because it was a it was a very big point
in the match. He was he'd lost the first set.
He was trying to get.
Speaker 2 (22:57):
Back in again and Salad a sperious.
Speaker 1 (23:01):
Player in Spain. Not an easy task and he's such
a good player. And this ball was out. It was
clearly out. The ballmark showed out. There was no other
ballmark around. Sometimes you can get the ballmarks confused, no
other ballmark around, and he's begging the umpire to get
out of the chair, which he knows he can't do.
So I guess the question is can we have the
umpires get out of the chair? No, because you know,
(23:22):
like the ATP and WT have said, like if we
start doing that, for one, everyone's going to want you
to jump out of the chair because there has been
Evelise also took a photo. Hers was a little bit
more ambiguous. I wouldn't say for sure that ball was out, but.
Speaker 2 (23:36):
Helenka took a photo the other day of a ball
that was clearly touching the line.
Speaker 1 (23:43):
Yeah.
Speaker 2 (23:43):
I mean, I think what we're actually talking about is
does electronic line calling on clay work. There has been
a lot of controversy about this because unlike hard courts,
unlike grass courts where the lines are painted on the
ballmark of clay skids, it tends to move, and for
(24:06):
whatever reason, it's way, way, way more open to interpretation.
And I suspect what happened here is the same way
that the ball machine, the ballmark machine, would be off
by I don't know, an inch in every direction. It's
taking away line space on one side and giving it
in line space on the other. I'm not an engineer.
(24:26):
I don't know, but it does raise a pretty creatical issue,
which is like, how could this egregious of a of
a call be made?
Speaker 1 (24:35):
I don't know.
Speaker 2 (24:35):
I don't know what the answer is. I will say this,
I don't miss the days where they came down and
like just sort of I will say I balled it.
That wasn't good TV and didn't seem that convincing when
the line judges did look at it.
Speaker 1 (24:45):
People can argue with me on this issue, and there
is no blanket statement on this, but the one blanket
statement I will make as a forma player and somebody
that had good eyes I did. I did. I made
from pretty good line calls when we had the electronic
line calling and we had to challenge and things like that.
It's a bit of a joke with the umpires. Humans
(25:07):
make mistakes all the time. Line calls are often wrong
from time to time on in matches, umpires make really
bad calls when they come down and they look at
a ballmark. I've had it happen to me many times
where I'm like, what the fuck are you looking at?
I am looking at the same mark as you, and
you're saying it's out and I'm saying it's in vice versa. Right,
(25:28):
you can have that argument all day long. This was
an absolute, pure mistake by the machine that guess what
happens all the time in the human world. Now here's
the thing. That same mistake or that same call might
happen to your opponent the next game, right, So you
know in a lot of ways that electronic line call
(25:49):
is going to fuck it up, maybe the same way
the next time around. So it's even Stevens whereas a
human might interpret it one way or the other, and
might I don't know. I wouldn't say that they like
a player more than the other. So maybe you know
a Roger Federer is going to get a call a
little bit more over, some guy who's a qualifier. Could
it happen? Probably has it happened.
Speaker 2 (26:07):
One hundred percent anytime there's subjectivity involved, subjective stuff gone.
Speaker 1 (26:11):
On, would I have lost my mind? As of o
Zverev apps fucking lutely. But the difference is that it's
not a human error. It's a calibrations issue probably with
the machine that they can fix, and it's going to
happen to your opponent more than likely in the same match.
So I am a little bit less pissed off at
the electronic line calling in general, because I just feel
(26:33):
like it's there's no human error on that, and I
feel like it's happened through the years so many times
with human error that I preferred this. It wasn't a mistake. Absolutely,
Could he go on about it. He did, and he
had every right too, because the boar was definitely out.
But I just feel like electronic line calling for me,
will always be the best way to call balls, agree,
(26:55):
period and a story. So whether it got it wrong,
it did, but they can calibrate it and move on,
whereas with a human error, you know, you see it
all the time, then the umpires get a little bit unsure.
The linesmen get a little bit panicky. They start making
How many times you see a linesman make a mistake
and then two games later that same guy makes the
same mistake, and then you finally like you look over
there as a player and you're like, oh, he's gone.
(27:15):
They just get rid of him, yeah, you know, and
then they replace. I don't miss that. I don't miss
that at all. That's why I like the electronic line calling.
Somebody else asked me a question about any more thoughts
on updated news on the US so mixed doubles our
top players embracing the idea of playing. Yes, they are.
Speaker 2 (27:30):
Remind us what the structure is for a mixed doubles,
because I think it's exciting.
Speaker 1 (27:36):
Well, instead of playing in the second week, which is
when you start playing mix, usually by the end of
the first week, oh usually Thursday, maybe of the first week,
you start playing mix, and it's just a little bit
too much of a grind for the singles great singles
plays to play singles doubles or even singles and mixed.
Particularly the guy's playing best of five. So they decided
to play the mixed doubles before the US Open starts.
(27:56):
In the qualifying week fan week, so it's fan week,
which listen, I'm okay with that. I'm okay with that
because I think it's a great because it gets packed
in qualifying week, it's packed now it's become a real
thing to go to. It's like free tickets basically, so
you're going to get great atmosphere out there, which I like.
And as a player that played you know, singles, doubles
and mixed and then predominantly doubles and mixed in the
(28:19):
latter part of my career where I had my success,
it would have been nice to have those crowds all
the time. And they do love the doubles and mixed
because most players that are recreational players play doubles and
mixed doubles, so I think they get a great bang
for their buck that week. The one problem I have
with it is this best first of four sets that
I hate. I am hearing there's a lot of top
players that are going to play a lot great and
(28:42):
so I think that's great because it's good for them
because they're getting matches before the tournament starts in singles.
So it's a it's a really interesting concept and idea,
and I don't dislike it. My issue is the first
to four, first to four. They're playing first to four games.
Speaker 2 (28:57):
It's just four games, Yeah, that's the match or what's
the point of that.
Speaker 1 (29:02):
They want the sets to be quicker? Okay, so I
think it's best of three sets, first of four games,
okay to win the set. So I forgets the three
all I guess they're playing a tie break. That's what
I'm hearing.
Speaker 2 (29:12):
And wasn't there something interesting about the qualification, like who
gets to be a team? Aren't they prioritizing singles singles
ranking the doubles rankings? So it does.
Speaker 1 (29:22):
If you're number one in doubles and your number one
is singles, your number one, and then you add who
you're playing with.
Speaker 2 (29:28):
So like a player such as Bethany Maddox Sands who
plays a lot of mixed doubles but does not play
singles well, and.
Speaker 1 (29:34):
He's not a great example right now because her ranking
is so low in doubles, I think she's dropped down.
Speaker 2 (29:39):
Question.
Speaker 1 (29:40):
Let's say a daniel A Nicole Mellica who's a top
the top twenty in the world. Now, might she miss
out playing with somebody twenty in the world in doubles.
If two players in the singles or every singles player
top twenty plays, yeah, she will miss out.
Speaker 2 (29:57):
So yeah, so there are some winners and losers, which
kind of what I was getting at. Yeah, but you're
okay with that.
Speaker 1 (30:02):
I like, I'm not against the week before. I think
it will be a great event, but I'm just against
the scoring system. That's I love.
Speaker 2 (30:09):
Really, I love doubles, and I love the idea that
the fans will get something up close and personal. And
you know what, I have my own very sort of
proto fascist way of dealing with making doubles and mixed
doubles popular. But I think people watching it is a
good thing, and I like the idea that the US
Open is is experimenting there.
Speaker 1 (30:30):
It's it's a malleable situation. We'll see how it goes,
and if it's a success, then we might see a
few other Grand Slams. But you do have some insight
in for that the top players. I'm hearing a lot
of top players are going to play, so it'll be
a lot of fun for the Carlitos now Carlitos Coco,
that'll be great. Just put it out there, or Carlos
and Emma Radicano, Carlos RADICANU just lost a joke. We
(30:52):
did get asked a very interesting but also a bit
of a ridiculous question. What do you think about the
apparent rigged or algorithm driven draws in the WTA? What
you make it? The same matchups over and over, Coco
benchic Eger and noscover mate. Let me just say, Paolo Paola,
Paola Castro, that's not it doesn't happen. Are it's cooled? Lot?
Speaker 2 (31:13):
Are people? Is this a conversation that people have?
Speaker 1 (31:15):
Let me tell you how this works?
Speaker 2 (31:16):
But wait, wait, wait is it? I just want to
understand the premise of the question. I do are people
on the internet saying that draws are rigged?
Speaker 1 (31:22):
Well, some people do think that. Some people do think that.
Speaker 2 (31:25):
And let me just have you ever in your thirty
plus years and the tennis who are ever seen or
heard anything that would indicate like, hey, actually this so
and so needs to move to this right?
Speaker 1 (31:37):
No? No, like this is this is what happens the
four seeds or actually sometimes.
Speaker 2 (31:46):
Twenty four seeds.
Speaker 1 (31:48):
Hole please, okay, So what happens is sometimes they do
it electronically or they just put it in the machine
like at the Grand slams now and they just pop
it out right. But like on the WTA Tour for example,
often not always, but most of the time, you'd literally
put two like what do you call them ping pong bars? Yeah,
(32:10):
ping pong balls, or you know, I don't even know
what you call them chips like with the number on it,
one or two, like a casino chip. Yeah, you put
the casino chip and you put one is always on top,
two is always on the bottom, right, then you put
What happens is you put three and four into a
bag and then you have somebody a player. They asked
(32:31):
players to come in, and most players like, fuck no,
I'm not doing the drawer. Like people run away from
the day because they don't want to have anything to
do with it. They're like, no, I don't want to.
I don't want to know who's in the.
Speaker 2 (32:39):
Drawer because you would know, because you would know the drawer.
I feel it could be fun.
Speaker 1 (32:43):
You get to sometimes the random doubles player will be like,
I'll do it because they know. They're like, yeah, let
me do it, right. So you go in and you
literally put your hand in the bag and pull out
a number and if three comes out, three goes to
the top, so three ghosts to the bottom of the
top half of the drawer.
Speaker 2 (32:58):
The seeds being placed is just and then four just
gets put on top right of the bottom half of
the drawer, which is why, unfortunately, over the last few
Grand Slams we've seen like Sinner and Alcarez be put
on the same side of the drawer because Sinner's one
and Alcarez keeps being fucking three. Yeah, so there's two
things that it seems like we need to address here
with Pola's question number one. And it's unclear whether Paula
(33:21):
understands this or not, but in case anybody doesn't, seeds
get placed. Seeds getting placed is based on ranking, with
the exception of Wimbledon, who places their own seeds best seeds,
grass or.
Speaker 1 (33:31):
Performance, but seeds get ranked, So three and four are
always top or bottom. And then it goes five, six, seven,
and eight get put into it again into a bag
and you pull out. Whatever number gets pulled out gets
placed on the top of the quarter final section up
the top right. So that's how it goes. So you
put four in and they get drawn out independently and
(33:52):
they go into the thirty spots in the drawer.
Speaker 2 (33:54):
Anybody doesn't know every tournament from your local, you know, community,
to USDA juniors to international tournaments to Grand Slams. Placing
seeds is part of it because you protect and give
advantages to the people who have a ranking or a
preferred status. That's why you want to be seen, which
is why you want to be seated, which is why
the rankings do matter. And then everybody else is just
(34:15):
the draw.
Speaker 1 (34:16):
Then what happens is once the seeds get picked, literally
every other little chip goes into the bag and you
just pull and you pull and you pull.
Speaker 2 (34:23):
And this is either happening literally or metaphorically with a computer.
But either way, I have never seen there's no any
And if people keep playing each other time and time
and time again, maybe they're Maybe it's fate, Paula, did
you think about that.
Speaker 1 (34:35):
Yeah, it's fate. And it's it is funny how you
can play on tour for like ten fifteen years and
never have played one certain person and then you're playing
or are you playing one person all the time. It
happens all the time, all the time. Yeah, but it's random,
it's totally roundom it's just unless you're in finals every week,
luck case, or you're going to clear everybody. Yeah, like
eagishron Tech, Yeah, is going to be in a lot
of matches because she's in a lot of swindler. No,
(34:57):
it's a joke about Egan Ostapenko. Keith Onland asked what
is causing all the ups and down play? Basically one
wins a one thousand and goes out first round. I
mean talking about Anissimova, Jack Draper, of course, Ostapenko recently
wasn't one thing.
Speaker 2 (35:11):
That's just tennis.
Speaker 1 (35:12):
That's just tennis.
Speaker 2 (35:13):
Man.
Speaker 1 (35:13):
It's hard to back it up. Sunshine double is really
hard to do. No one's ever, not very many people
have done it. Anissimova, of course, you know, had a
terrific win over in the Middle East, and then she's
gone up and down with some injuries. Ostapenko plays indoors,
very different surface, very different conditions, goes to Madrid, losers,
it's altitude, it's very different, completely probably different balls. It's
(35:37):
really hard to win and do back to back.
Speaker 2 (35:39):
Also, like you're you know, at the end of the day,
you're talking about a bunch of human beings. Like I
think when people and this is sort of. We've been
talking about this a lot in my household because of
the basketball players that are going on. As much as
they try to ignore the basketball playoffs, can't help but
talk about basketball around this time, especially if the next
you're still in at which my wife is very thrilled
that they are so like, you know, because.
Speaker 1 (36:00):
Man, I got so lucky yesterday. That was such a foul.
That was such a foul.
Speaker 2 (36:04):
They should not have won yesterday's game. But the better
teams on average win more because they play best of,
best of, best of, and the you know, in a
lot of these team sports, you know, the better teams
usually do win. What's fun about tennis is like sometimes
the better player loses. Sometimes the player who wins more
of the total points still loses. Sometimes the player who
(36:25):
shouldn't have a shot because of something that's gone on,
you know, in an individual sport, like the results results
can vary. And I think that's like, to me, such
a that's such an ad But I also get that people,
you know, you just have to learn a lot of
new names and just get excited, which.
Speaker 1 (36:38):
Brings me to the next question. High on Tennis do
a deep dive about the climate, surface and which players
have more of an advantage over the others. So that's
an interesting way to think about it. And I do
want to get to Novak after this question, because usually
most players that are sort of malleable on all surfaces,
I would say sable Anca eager to a certain degree,
(36:58):
and the men's game obviously through the years, Roger Rafa,
they adapt and they're so.
Speaker 2 (37:04):
Good, and that's what makes them good.
Speaker 1 (37:05):
And that's what makes them so good.
Speaker 2 (37:07):
Anybody can play well on their favorite surface on a
great day when they're feeling great. But the champions figure
out how altitude, ball, surface conditions, mental stuff. They bring
it all the time.
Speaker 1 (37:18):
Yeah, and you know, it just depends on the way
you hit the ball. Do you slide well on clay,
do you move well on grass? I mean, Roger's perfect example,
and Novaka being able to move on all surfaces. They've
adapted on all surfaces. Serena adapted to all surfaces. Her
serve was so big she could win so many free
points on any surface at any time.
Speaker 2 (37:38):
I think about that a lot when it comes to
Sablanca and Serena, which is just some players have such
an imposing game that they can make I mean yes,
they are also making adjustments. But Sabalanca is playing an
offensive game as is you know, Serena Williams on every
surface regardless of you know, but players who are a
little bit more CounterPunch oriented have to do something different.
Speaker 1 (38:01):
Yeah, they have to adapt a little bit more exact
in some ways. In others they don't miss a lot.
So you still have to beat them. You have to
hit the winners against them, a Switzlena for example, or
it was Niyaki or a hallop. You know, they're gonna
run you down. They're gonna run balls down. They're gonna
make you come forward on a fast court, and if
you're not willing to come in and be aggressive, you're
gonna lose against a play like that if you play
them on clay.
Speaker 2 (38:23):
I do think it is worth mentioning.
Speaker 1 (38:24):
Though.
Speaker 2 (38:24):
One of the things that I don't love about the
surface conversation in today's tennis is just how same a
lot of the surfaces have become. Because it used to
be very play was slower, grass was faster. There used
to be a regular amount of tournaments on carpet, Like
imagine if there was a carpet slam. I loved stephie
(38:44):
Graff would never have lost.
Speaker 1 (38:46):
A match on.
Speaker 2 (38:48):
Martinez. She loved exactly fast courts. And so for me,
the results of yesteryear where you see a Richard Krachek
in a late stage of a grass tournament or the
bear cetags and you know, Spanish clear court specialists and
Thomas Muster and stuff, they're less so because the game
has optimized so much for this kind of I think samness, Yeah,
(39:08):
which is not you know, it's not a critique so
much is just I missed the random, you know, like,
well it's clay season and let's see if someone are
random is going to win the friends chibn Yeah, and
they probably not going to have add a lot of
the time.
Speaker 1 (39:19):
A question that was posed to me about Nolay, about
Novak's body language and press conference quotes and tactical issues,
et cetera. We talked about this last week, Caitlin. He's
on the worry index. He's still on the worry index.
And I'll tell you why. And I don't know if
I told you did I tell you this story about
his interview that I did with him a couple of
years ago, and that year, so when we talked about
it right, And there was something about the way he
(39:39):
answered that that it triggered something in me that went, oh, oh,
I think he's kind of sort of over this a
little bit, and not like overplaying and over the notoriety
and over the clap you know, of the crowd. And
I mean, the thing that's really hard to let go
of as a tennis player, especially someone so great as him,
is the adulation and the love of what the people
(40:02):
are getting from you, which is unreal tennis. Like, my god,
there's nothing better than winning a twenty five ball rally
and sliding and you know, hustling and grinding and winning
that point and having that adulation. Oh my god, there's
nothing like it. It's like legal addiction.
Speaker 2 (40:18):
Right.
Speaker 1 (40:20):
But at some point, your age catches up with you.
The grind catches up with you, the packing your bags
catches up with you, the being away from your family
catches up with you, and at some point that shifts
your mindset a little bit. In the grinding moments in
matches of eh, do I do I really want to
(40:41):
like hang in there today? Do I really want to
like run that one ball down today? And your mind
is saying yes, But your entirety of your mindset and
body and practice and your thought process. More importantly, your
thought process is not locked in. Do you and I
just think he's lost his locked inness?
Speaker 2 (41:00):
Do you think given that we've compared a lot of
this year's nola to last year's nolay where he seemed
not bothered by losing a lot, and his his in retrospect,
his crystal clear focus.
Speaker 1 (41:15):
On was the Olympics.
Speaker 2 (41:16):
The Olympic title that had eluded him felt like a
foregone conclusion, Like he was like, Okay, well, I kind
of don't care how this year goes, because I have
one goal and I've accomplished all the other ones, and
I'm going to make sure that this one goes. Do
you think it's different from this year? From what you've seen?
Speaker 1 (41:32):
The thing that I think is different this year is
that he was absolutely, as you said, singlely focused on
winning a goal, and he talked about at most obvious
and he played so freakin' well. And I think there's
a little bit of a flame that was distinguished. Boom,
after that was done. It was extinguished, thank you, It
was just extinguished. It was gone. Yes, it was like, okay,
(41:54):
what do I have to prove now zero, he has
nothing to prove. The only thing he has left, and
it's the only thing he talks about, is winning one
more Grand Slam, to have twenty five Grand Slams and
have the absolute ultimate record.
Speaker 2 (42:06):
I mean, he already has a record, Margaret Courts record
is not real.
Speaker 1 (42:09):
Well we know this, but yeah, Serena really really wanted
twenty five, you know, but she didn't get it. And
does it define her, No, of course not. She's still
the greatest female player of all time, you know, and
arguably the greatest player of all time. Novak now is
sitting in that same spot, and I think the only
thing that drives him is maybe winning one more And
I could see him literally doing Pete Sampras and dropping
(42:30):
the mic and being like, I'm done. But having said that, Caitlin,
it's not that easy to win a Grand Slam anymore
when you're not even winning fucking matches at regular tournaments
in best of three sets against these guys. Come on,
do you think if he were going to win one
more Wimbledon Wimbledon? I think so. I think the clay
He sort of said it in the press conference. He's like,
(42:52):
you know, I'm hoping to obviously do well in France.
I don't know Verbet and what he said, but it
was sort of insinuated. Eh. I know I'm not playing
well enough on clay, but you know, he knows how
good it is on grass. He's a best grasscore player
and Wembledon champion over the last fifteen years. And the
guy that's beaten him twice in two finals is still there.
(43:13):
So is he going to get past him? I don't know,
but he's probably hoping that he has a great day
again like he did at the Olympics last year. And
maybe maybe maybe, But I don't care who you are.
When the plaque starts getting on the brain and you're
not winning those matches, it gets harder and harder.
Speaker 2 (43:28):
Yeah, one week's time will be the beginning of REALM
brings back with it Yannick center Chao yah, Nick Yannick.
Let's see what that ends up being. There's already a
lot of press. He's gotten some shoutouts in Berg today.
Everyone's sort of allies on. I mean, thankfully he's back, Like, honestly,
you're excited for me to be back.
Speaker 1 (43:47):
I'm happy he's back. It's shit that he was put
away for three months because come on, you guys know
how I feel about it.
Speaker 2 (43:55):
We've talked about that before. But what we have not
yet talked about, which I would like to but I
am not yet prepared, is I think we should talk
about the Carlos Alcoraz documentary.
Speaker 1 (44:04):
I have not seen it yet, but you will. I
will watch it. We did get asked about it on
Twitter on socials about what I thought about it, but
I haven't seen it.
Speaker 2 (44:14):
I would love for us to have a discussion involving
the audience. So if you watch it, okay and you
have thoughts, questions, follow ups, concerns.
Speaker 1 (44:24):
Some people have written me about it, so I'll put
a little list together.
Speaker 2 (44:27):
Let's make a list and we'll do a Madrid rap
Italy preview and a Carlos Alcarez documentary. What I've seen
looks exciting. I'm excited to watch it. It looks interesting. Netflix
Spain did it.
Speaker 1 (44:37):
Yeah, it'll be interesting, and that's one of the that's
interesting of the Madrid on them, which is interesting.
Speaker 2 (44:43):
Yes, Netflix Spain having done this as opposed to Netflix US.
Netflix US did breakpoint, and I suspect there's probably a
little bit of a directional artistic difference.
Speaker 1 (44:54):
Oh interesting, Okayflis.
Speaker 2 (44:57):
Did an Argentina documentary a couple next with Netflix. Argentina
did a documentary a couple of years ago about the
famous tennis player who never got to number one, who
maybe should have from Argentina, and it was it was
better than I can't remember his name, which is why
I'm not mentioning it. But it was better than things
that I've seen out of Netflix US always like Yama villasms.
(45:18):
Oh wow, he never got to number one, right wow?
He was like Ruffa before Ruffa. Right, so he was
just good on stories that are not so obvious. I
think maybe Netflix US, certainly the Box of Box production
was super corporate and not very good.
Speaker 1 (45:30):
So maybe this will be well, we'll see, we will cry.
I know there's a lot more questions. I'll get to
you back to you Ale on socials and answer them
as much as I can, but we've only got so
much time to talk about stuff. Who do you think
Caitlin before you leave is going to win Madrid Men's
and Women's.
Speaker 2 (45:46):
Why don't we just go with Coco go off? Oh well,
I kind of love for Coco to win it. Okay,
all right, Coco and Men's. I am tempted to say
something kind of crazy. Both of these would be crazy.
So I'm going to take as my answer, what about
Kaylor Fritz klalor Fritz.
Speaker 1 (46:04):
I don't think I don't think that's a bad choice. Actually, there,
Madrid is a good, big service. Do well. No Carlos
because he pulled out right because of the injury. Hopefully
he's okay going into Fritz. I've got two Americans. I'm
just gonna leave it with that.
Speaker 2 (46:21):
I'm not going to say all right, I'm not going
to say, well, see how I said back, see how
you did.
Speaker 1 (46:28):
But anyway, all right, everyone, thanks for joining us today
on the outskirts of my apartment. We have been enjoying
the sun.
Speaker 2 (46:36):
Bye bye,
Popular Podcasts
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com
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!