Sinner gets an Open win and a rare New York treatment

They are playing the US Open in New York where the fans are not only wise to what’s happening, but also wiseacres, known to pick on an athlete’s failings in the loudest of disparaging words.

So what was with their response to Jannik Sinner? Maybe they had an idea that this was an unusual situation. And it was. It was announced at the end of last week that he was docked prize money and ranking points from the tournament where the first result appeared. He had tested positive for trace amounts of the Anabolic steroid Clostebol twice in a period of eight days in March, but there was no penalty because it was ruled that Sinner was not at fault.

This brought skepticism from some, including Tony Kornheiser on ESPN’s 'Pardon The Interruption,' who explained how tennis works.

“He’s a star,” Kornheiser said.

And as everyone in the business knows, tennis does not want to lose its stars. Indeed not only is Sinner a star, but he is also No. 1 in the ATP rankings, ahead of Carlos Alcaraz and Novak Djokovic.

Certainly, Sinner didn’t want to miss The Open, the biggest tournament of any in America. 

And Sinner, who said the positive tests were due to using applications of the ointment for a cut from a trainer whom he subsequently fired, not only didn’t miss his first-round match Tuesday, but he won. 

He defeated Mackie McDonald 2-6, 6-2, 6-1, 6-2. Bizarre because Sinner gave up 6 games in the first set and then only 5 combined in the next three sets.

McDonald learned the game in Berkeley, won a championship at UCLA and seemed to have a solid future as a pro. That hasn’t been the case so far.

There was nothing out of the ordinary, cheers for Sinner’s better shots, without any noticeable negative chants or shouts.  The obligatory on-court, post-match interview went on as scheduled, but there were no references to Sinner’s problem.

Obviously tennis spectators are not quite as demanding as those from, say, baseball or the NFL. You know that had it been a ball player who was caught in the mess as Sinner, he would have been booed as soon as stepped on the field—all the while protesting his innocence. Sinner, who is from Northern Italy, said he was pleased with the way the fans treated him. 

You don’t often hear that comment after a sporting event in New York.

At Wimbledon, this Taylor makes sweet music

It wasn’t so much that Taylor Fritz’ reached the Wimbledon quarterfinals, no small accomplishment for an American, it was the way he did it.

Fritz lost the first two sets to Alexander Zverev, who at number 4 is ranked above him and has won two Grand Slam titles, and then came rolling back for a 4-6, 6-7(4), 6-4, 7-6(3), 6-3 victory which was as meaningful as it was exciting. For American men’s tennis that is. US ladies have done well enough, because of the Williams sisters and now Emma Navarro has appeared (and knocked out bewildered Coco Gauff). 

However, no American man has won a Wimbledon singles title since Pete Sampras. That was in 2000 when Fritz, now 26, wasn’t even a year old. Not that anyone believes that with Novak Djokovic (a seven-time winner), defending champ Carlos Alcaraz, or the top player in the rankings, Jannik Sinner, Fritz will get that title. Still, he is there, and that’s progress.  

So he’s not the most famous individual on the globe with the first name of Taylor (yes, Ms. Swift is). Fritz can make sweet music when the ball flies off the racquet strings and makes pleasant sounds when the racquet meets the ball. We’re not talking music here, although there can be a sweet sound when a ball flies off the racquet strings.

U.S. men’s tennis is longing for the days when Sampras, Andre Agassi, Michael Chang and Jim Courier were greedily collecting grand slams. The U.S. tennis establishment has been promising (and hoping) for a return to the good—not-so-old days.

Fritz, Francis Tiafoe and Tommy Paul were mentioned perhaps all too frequently of being the cast that returned America to where it used to be in the men’s game. Sort of like waiting for the Giants to finish in front of the Dodgers. At least Fritz remains at Wimbledon into the quarters where he will face Lorenzo Musetti of Italy. They have met on three previous occasions, with the American winning two of them.

“It was amazing,” said Fitz of his victory. “To do that on Centre Court at Wimbledon, two sets down.”

Centre County, under the roof, the weather almost from the start of the Wimbledon fortnight has been traditional, rain.

As almost everyone knows Fritz grew up with the game. His mother, Kathy May, was a champion, and his father, Guy Fritz, was a coach. Taylor grew up in Southern California, where he quickly showed his skills. He skipped college, turned pro early, and has been more than a minimal success, taking Indian Wells in 2022.

At the time that was big. Now he is chasing something bigger.

Djokovic is quite respectable — and No. 1

Mark Twain told us politicians, old buildings and prostitutes become respectable with age. Dare we add veteran tennis players?

A better term might be beloved. Like Roger and Rafa and maybe Andy Murray were. And Djokovic now seems to be. Yes, those were chants of “Novak,  Novak” tumbling onto the clay court. Djokovic’s right knee was aching. His previous match didn’t finish until 3:06 a.m. Sunday. Monday afternoon he was a set and a breakdown against the 25-year-old Argentine, Francesco Cerundolo. 

But you don’t become No. 1 in the world because you are timid. Never mind the forehands and backhands. This became a matter of heart, something of which the Serb has plenty of. And in 4 hours 39 minutes, Djokovic was a 6-1, 5-7, 3-6, 7-5, 6-3 winner. Just barely, but when you’re great, as we can describe Djokovic, just barely is enough.

“I maybe was two or three points away from losing this match,” he said. 

But he didn’t lose. Even though twice during the second set the medical staff came out to massage the sore knee.  

In basketball, football, and baseball those two or three points seem more like 10 points or 200 when the edge belongs to a champion. He or she finds a way as did the Warriors in their glory years.   

Who knows how much more Novak has in him? Time is the ultimate opponent. You keep getting older, and the people think you are done. If he couldn’t get out of the first round of the French Open tournament he couldn’t win he has no chance at the other Slams.

Serena Williams departed. So did Federer. Djokovic battles on, gaining popularity as he works to pick up victories. 

Tennis and golf are sports without a home team. Both need names, recognizable figures, and stars large enough and bright enough to make even the non-fan turn on the TV set.

Djokovic has gone through a great deal and along the way put tennis through a great deal — refusing to be vaccinated, bounced from Australia — still it was out of the country, but he never was out of the news.

With the win Monday, Djokovic broke a tie with Federer for the most match wins at a major, now 370 — not exactly a surprise when you have the most Slams.

He is supposed to meet No. 7 seed Casper Ruud in the quarterfinals on Wednesday. Ruud, who eliminated No. 12 Taylor Fritz of the U.S. and southern California, in four sets Monday, lost to Djokovic in the French Open final last year and to Rafael Nadal in the 2022 title match.

“How did I find a way to win again?” 

Djokovic asked nobody in particular — but in effect the entire tennis world.

“I don’t know.”

Truth be told, he knows. We know. When he steps on a court he’s there for one purpose. To stay where he resides, at the top. Whether he’s popular or not, and without question at last he is.

What would Bud Collins have nicknamed winning Swiatek?

INDIAN WELLS — Iga Swiatek doesn’t need much on the court these days — my goodness she recorded a bagel in her semifinal — other than one of those colorful nicknames invented by the late, great Bud Collins.

He labeled Steffi Graf  “Fraulein Forehand,”  Venus and Serena Williams “Sisters Sledge Hammer. He might have anointed Swiatek the “Polish Rifle,” except that was used for the NFL quarterback Ron Jaworski, who is American.

Swiatek truly is Polish, born in Warsaw, and without question right now the best women’s tennis player in creation.

She turned the final of the BNP Paribas Open into a quick romp Sunday, defeating bewildered Maria Sakkari, 6-4,6-0. 

The match lasted only 1 hour and 8 minutes. Sometimes it seems to take that long to open a new can of tennis balls.

“Sorry I couldn’t put on a better fight,” said Sakkari, who two nights earlier defeated Coco Gauff in a semifinal.

Two years ago, at the same place, Indian Wells Tennis Garden — when you spend millions to build a sports complex among sand dunes and cacti — it was virtually the same. Swiatek defeated Sakkari 6-4, 6-1. 

In the rankings, she means, a place to which she seems intent — and content — never returning. In her week and a half of competition at Indian Wells, the 22-year-old Swiatek lost only 21 games in six matches. 

“She’s aggressive but she’s solid,” Sakkari said, summarizing Swiatek’s incredibly effective tennis.

It’s too early in a career that could last another 15 years or so to predict how Swiatek someday may be judged against the greats, Margaret  Court, Serena Williams, Martina Navratilova, Graf, but among the current females, she’s exactly where the number indicates, first.

It would have been interesting to see what would have been, had Gauff defeated Sakkari, but perhaps the best thing about tennis at any level is the actual playing not the promising. When the opportunity presents itself how do you respond

Swiatek’s response across the net is quite apparent and resourceful. She handled herself beautifully. Same thing after the tournament.

“I’m really proud of myself and super happy,” was her comment after literally lifting the crystal championship trophy. “Even though this tournament looked like the scores, maybe I had everything under control. It wasn't from the beginning to the end. I felt really good on the last two matches. Big amount of confidence.”

And for the bettors who followed the advice of Zachary Cohen in one of the tennis publications to parlay Swiatek and Carlos Alcaraz, who defeated Daniil Medved, 7-6, 6-1. Big money. 

Wonder if Cohen has a decent backhand?

At Indian Wells, Mother Nature rains, Carlos Alcaraz reigns to find a way to hang on

To the match. Not an umbrella.

He had taken a 6-1 lead in the first set of the BNP Paribas semifinal. He had won 19 straight matches and in the process a Grand Slam, the Australian. His opponent, Carlos Alcaraz, said of Sinner, “He’s the best player in the world right now.  

Right, and it doesn’t rain in the Coachella Valley in springtime. Sinner lost, or rather, Alcaraz won 1-6, 6-3, 6-2. He will play another former champion, Dan Medvedev, who in the semi defeated the American Tommy Paul, 1-6, 7-6, 6-2.

“I tried to play obviously good tennis, which I have done,” said  Sinner, “especially the first set. Then I made a couple of mistakes. You know the momentum has changed. He raised his level.”

Which since Alcaraz is No. 2 in the world and Sinner No. 3, it isn’t quite like having to leap the Empire State Building. It was just that Sinner had flown in the first set, verifying the betting line making him such a solid favorite the tennis folk concluded it was a given.

 “Who’s going to stop Jannik?” questioned somebody. Well, good old Mother Nature — he had a 2-1 lead in the first set when the weather intervened, play being delayed more than two hours. And eventually, Alcaraz, who won the BNP a year ago.

“Obviously a tough one to swallow,” said Sinner, previously unbeaten in 2024.

The thinking in men’s tennis has been Alcaraz, the Spaniard, eventually would replace Novak Djokovic, the game’s best. Someday at least. At the moment, Djokovic remains first, and even though he’s 36 and the two heir apparents are in their early 20s, the change could be in the distance.   

Alcaraz had an impressive start, but in the last few months he has slipped. And  Sinner has surged. Then came the Saturday meeting, proof that all the speculation might mean nothing.

“Well, I’m really happy to classify (qualify) for another final,” said Alcaraz. “It means a lot to me to play at such a great level and be able to play another final.”

In the post-match interview, Alcaraz was reminded Thursday he had to flee when a hive of bees swarmed in while Carlos was playing.

 “On Thursday,” he was told, “you had the bees and then you had the rain delay today. You came from down a set. Kind of a wild 48 hours.”

At Indian Wells, Paul has chance to make us forget Australian collapse

INDIAN WELLS — The chance is there for Tommy Paul, the chance to make us forget. Forget what happened  Down Under. The chance to make himself a winner of one of the world’s biggest tennis tournaments outside the Slams. The chance to alter the memories of his failure in the Australian Open several weeks ago when he let a two-to-one set lead slip away and lost in five sets, the final one 6-0.

That caught the attention of everyone in the game and many outside the game. Here was a 25-year-old American, one of the new generation, not only unable to close the deal but looking bad in the process.

He became a headline. But he didn’t become depressed, on the contrary. He got on a jet for California, got a practice court, and told us, “Sometimes the painful endings are exactly what you need.”

Paul has come along with his age-group pals, Taylor Fritz, Francis Tiafoe and Reilly Opelka. Tiafoe made it to the semis of the U.S Open, Fritz won Indian Wells and Opela has his own victories. What Paul has, in some minds, is a blown opportunity.

Yes, unfair, but he seems unperturbed.

Paul grew up in North Carolina but now lives on his mother’s farm in Southern New Jersey, where, no he doesn’t plant corn or drive tractors but the few weeks he’s home does chores like feeding the chickens

There was a shirtless photo of him standing next to a tractor in a tennis publication, but that was to get the game noticed, which certainly did. Paul has a footballer’s physique.

Whether that will be an advantage or disadvantage in the match against Medvedev, a veteran with a strong forehand and an aggressive style we will learn quickly enough.

This is the fourth straight year there’s been a U.S. men’s player in the BNP semis. Paul was asked what it feels like to have broken through.  

”Your success now,” wondered a journalist, “does it feel a little bit sweeter, the stuff you’ve gone through, the stuff we learned (about his lifestyle) on Netflix, the late-night calls to your mom, maybe partying a little too much (when)younger, being a bit of a late bloomer? The fact you’ve locked it down and become the player you are now, does it make this success even sweeter?”

Paul was a bit reluctant.

“Maybe,” he said “I don’t know what it would feel like if I broke into the scene right away. I’m not sure. I mean it feels good. Obviously, I have another match on Saturday that I want to win. I’m not satisfied yet. So obviously I want to end the week with a win. You know, I want to win tournaments. That’s always the goal.”

Navarro, Gauff are on the numbers

INDIAN WELLS — Only a number. So said Emma Navarro, who ranks No. 23 in women’s tennis after Wednesday upsetting Aryna Sabalenka, No. 2.

Only a number. So accepts Coco Gauff about the birthday that Wednesday ended her teenage years.

Tennis is all about numbers. No matter how old you are or how young.

The BNP Paribas Open rolled on as finally, the clouds rolled by. Sunshine in the desert, the Coachella Valley, and success for American women, expected in the case of the birthday girl, Gauff, now 20; probably unexpected with the onetime college star, Navarro.

Emma, 22, only a few months away from an NCAA Championship while at Virginia, won arguably the biggest match of her career, 6-3, 3-6, 6-2, over Sabalenka, who in February became a Grand Slam champion with a victory in the Australian Open.

Gauff ranks No. 3, but she’s been the No. 1 star in America since her U.S. Open title in September doing TV interviews and getting a huge spread in Vogue magazine. Despite the glamor and glory, Coco comes at you as unpretentiously as, well, a cup of cocoa.

 In her quarterfinal match Wednesday she blitzed Belgian doubles specialist Elise Mertens, 6-0, 6-2.

“Finally got a win on my birthday, which was great,” Gauff said without emotion. “Yeah, I have nothing to say about the match. It was pretty straightforward, and hopefully, I can continue the good tennis.”

That the numbers seem to be more than nothing, but it’s her opinion that counts.

Navarro, understandably, was more emotional after finishing what might become her breakthrough match.

“Yeah, feeling excited,” said Navarro. “I’ve worked really hard over the years just to get to this point,”  

That hardly separates her from the other dozens of female players. The separation is when that work pays off, as this is much against Sabalenka, the powerful Russian. This time it did.

“I guess I wasn’t comfortable with my ranking,” said Navarro. “There’s not an opportunity for that. When I was younger I played in a way where I wanted to work myself into points and work myself into matches, and kind of just react to what my opponent was doing, kind of take a step back, OK, how are they going to play? But at this level, there is no time for that. You are striking or getting struck.”

She was striking. So was Gauff, although for Coco she scores like it was business as usual. Which is exactly what it turned out to be.

In this numbers game. The American ladies had the perfect ones. Or should that be 6-1?

Osaka’s comeback halted at Indian Wells

INDIAN WELLS — She took time away, putting down her racquets and picking up baby formula. Going from tennis champion to champion mother and back takes work and time. As Naomi realizes now.

We’re in the California desert, maybe only 150 miles down the interstate from Hollywood. The Academy Awards show was Sunday night.  But this is the real world, the sports world, where comebacks are neither rapid nor easy no matter how good you were.

And Osaka with four Grand Slam titles was damn good! Greater even. But Monday she wasn’t as good as Elise Mertens of Belgium, losing, 7-5, 6-4, in her third-round match of the BNP Paribas Open at Indian Wells.

Although to some — Osaka lists herself as Japanese but was raised in New York and now lives in L.A. — the result was a disappointment but might not have been that big a surprise. Mertens also has won four Slams, and although they’ve been in doubles she’s a very accomplished singles player who, while Osaka has been raising her baby, was lifting awards.

Mertens next will play Aryna Sabalenka, the Wimbledon champion who Monday outlasted Emma Raducanu, 6-3, 7-3.  

Osaka, 26, went through numerous emotional problems not long ago, refusing to talk to the media after one match, and then withdrawing moments before another match. Newspapers and television networks responded with stories about mental health.

Then in January 2023, Osaka announced she was expecting—the father is her boyfriend, rapper Cordae (Amri Duston). The baby was born in July. Osaka’s first match after her return was on Jan. 1, 2024, in New Zealand, in preparation for the Australian Open.

That Osaka would come to the BNP and Indian Wells was expected. She had a bye then a victory. Now a loss.

“I had a plan today,” said Osaka. “And I didn’t really execute.”

Sounds like an NFL quarterback, not a world-class tennis player. Of course, maybe it was because the other team (Mertens) wouldn’t allow her to execute. Mertens, 38, has been there, done that in doubles or singles.

Then the admission. “I haven’t played in a while,” conceded Osaka, “so it was kind of surprising, her game.” A little bit that’s a Hollywood lie if ever there was one.

At Indian Wells, Djokovic has the answer

INDIAN WELLS — So at the place labeled Tennis Paradise, the No. 1  player in the world — and maybe ever, according to Sports Illustrated — was contemplating a stemwinder question not at all to do with paradise. 

“You’ve had such a spectacular career,” the 6-2, 5-7, 6-3, inquiry began and you knew what was coming — as did Novak Djokovic. “An incredible student of the game, my question is, this sport gives us so much. If you had to boil it down to just one or two key lessons that this sport has provided you, what would that be?”    

Fortunately, only moments before, Djokovic had concluded his first match in the BNP Paribas Open in five years, a 6-2, 5-7, 6-3 victory over Aleksandar Vukic. He could be pleasant and forgiving. And surely the cover story on him by Jon Wertheim in the latest Sports Illustrated helped.

“The last GOAT (Greatest of All Time) Standing,” would tend to make a man more accepting of irritating comments and double faults. Not that the guy nicknamed the Joker hasn’t always gone about his business making others laugh as well as applaud from his earlier years before he started collecting Grand Slam titles — he now has 24, two more than Rafael Nadal. The Joker was known as a joker. His mimicry of other players was as big a hit as were some of his forehands. 

And apropos of nothing but considering the Serb, now 36, had to battle his way to the top, there was the time he won the U.S. Open at Flushing Meadows and in the awards presentation was introduced as Da-okovic.

Roger Federer retired. Nadal, too often injured, may be retiring. Carlos Alcaraz, who Sunday defeated Felix Auger Aliassime, the Canadian, 6-2. 6-3, supposedly is the heir apparent. And Janik Sinner of Italy won the Australian Open in February.  

But for now the men’s game is in the possession of Djokovic.

The nonsense that presented Djokovic from entering the US or caused him to be expelled from Australia is a memory. If a painful memory.  

He’s on the march, and that’s as exciting for his sport as it is for Novak. Fans love winners. His presence at Indian Wells will help fill the 16,100-seat stadium.  

And regarding that complex, convoluted question tossed at Djokovic, he handled the situation with a quick feel-good response. 

“Very good question,” Djokovic insisted regarding the lessons tennis has offered. He smiled, either an affirmation or a put-down.

“I need a little prep on that to give you a right answer.”

“But I would say out of the blue it definitely made me more resilient, I think, just for everything else in life, really. Competing at the highest level for 20 years has allowed me to tap into parts of myself mentally, physically and emotionally that I didn’t know existed. I had to really dig deep so many times to overcome challenges and reach history.”  

A tough, long question to The Joker, brings a heartfelt answer.

Gilbert shares in Coco’s victory

So that young lady standing next to Brad Gilbert’s daughter, Zoe, in the photo Gilbert posted, happens to have won the U.S. Open women’s tennis championship, Coco Gauff. 

Neither Zoe nor Gilbert hit a shot Saturday at Flushing Meadows during the tournament, but you understand they were heavily involved in Gauff hitting the jackpot. 

Gilbert joined Gauff’s entourage a few days ago to provide advice, which in any sport — particularly one involving head-to-head competition — can be advantageous.

At 19, remarkably quick, and wonderfully perceptive, Gauff seemed to have everything needed to be one of the greats, except experience. 

Which is where Gilbert came in.

Maybe Gauff rallies to defeat Aryna Sabalenka, 3-6, 6-3, 6-2, in the final if she and her family had never decided to connect with Gilbert. Then again, maybe she doesn’t.

Gilbert, who grew up in the East Bay community of Piedmont, was effective and wise enough as a player to make the quarters finals at both the U.S. Open and Wimbledon. But his fame is not so much for what he did but for what he wouldn’t allow his opponents to do. As emphasized in his book, “Winning Ugly,” it was the mind game where he excelled. 

Don’t get flustered because the guy — or woman — across the net is serving aces. Stay patient. Capitalize on an opponent’s weakness. The tactics helped make Andre Agassi a winner again after he (and his game) hit bottom, and it surely assisted Gauff.

The match on Saturday began all wrong for Gauff, who lost her serve in the first game. The normal boisterous crowd of more than 27,000 at Arthur Ashe Stadium, 99 percent of which was hooting and hollering for Gauff, sensed trouble.

But up in the ESPN broadcast the vibe seemed more positive.

Sabalenka had won the Australian Open, and she hit with decisive power. But almost as if the announcers, all former stars themselves, were flipping pages from Gilbert’s book, they mused about possibilities.

Sabalenka was due to cool off, and Gauff should be heating up. And, of course, that’s exactly what took place.

Sabalenka will climb Monday to the No. 1 position in the WTA rankings, based on season-long results, but as she stood there tearfully at the end, that hardly seemed consolation.

Gauff also cried a bit at the end, but that was as much in relief as happiness. She had been in the headlines for a couple of years now, and she’s made the top.

Not that in other ways she wasn’t already there. Coco knows there’s a world beyond the white lines. When Thursday night her semifinal against Karolina Muchova was delayed by protesters, one of whom glued his shoes to the floor of the upper deck at Ashe, Gauff at first expressed dismay but then pointed out she understood why in a free country like the United States an individual would want to take an unpopular stand.

Brad Gilbert has taken less controversial stands in the game of tennis. The results have helped create champions.

It shouldn’t end like this for Venus

It’s not supposed to end like this. But of course, too often it does. No matter how great you have been, how many records you have shattered, or how many people you have thrilled.

More than a few years ago it was Willie Mays hanging on with the New York Mets and being unable to hang on to fly balls he once turned into automatic outs.

And Joe Willie Namath, with the San Diego Chargers, so far from Broadway and so far from the quarterback who would make the cover of Sports Illustrated and make himself a legend. 

Now, it is Venus Williams, who on Tuesday in the first round of the U.S. Open was not just defeated but crushed, 6-1, 6-1. By a qualifier, no less, Greet Minnen of Belgium. 

How stunning, how terrible even if Venus can take it, soldiering on, flailing so to speak, as the rest of us can’t. We didn’t want to hear Pavarotti when his voice was gone. We don’t want to watch Venus Williams when her game is gone.

Which, sadly, it has been for a few years. 

It’s a problem as old as sports, as life really. We keep aging. And new kids keep moving in. Father Time — or if you will, Mother Time — gets the last forehand. Really the last laugh.

Through a remarkable career that started with her first pro match in Oakland, in October 1994, Venus has been careful with her words and protective of her emotions.  

Younger sister Serena might misbehave now and then, but Venus, even when losing matches, never lost control. She remained steadfast and resolute. 

Also from her comments after being routed by Minnen, she seemed somewhat in self-delusion. 

“I don’t think I played badly,” said Venus. “It was just one of those days where I was a bit unlucky.”

In winning only one game of each set? That’s not misfortune, that’s a misunderstanding. Her game has left with the years, and what might be acceptable — to us, if not Venus — is if she were competing against others her own age (not that there are any), she wouldn’t get thrashed.  

The argument against Venus giving in, not so much giving up, has been presented here at various times — a tennis player, unlike a football or basketball player, is in no particular danger as time passes.

Maybe a few more pulled muscles, but no worry about being hit by a 300-pound linebacker. Still, how will one of the all-time greats accept a match like this one?  

Her response after the defeat was typical Venus, all class, no whining, “I have to give credit to my opponent,” she said. “I mean there wasn’t a shot she couldn’t make. Even when I hit really amazing shots she hit a winner or a drop shot.”

What Venus may have hit was the bottom. Stunning. Terrible.

Venus keeps at it; tennis is her life

The other day the man on the Tennis Channel was talking about Venus Williams as if she were part of a traveling exhibition as opposed to the champion she’s become. You never know, he said in what seemed as much a warning as a promotion before a match about to begin in the Western and Southern tournament in Cincinnati; how much longer we’ll be able to watch Venus.

A legitimate approach one guesses, at this stage of Williams’ remarkably long and until the last couple of years, eminently successful career. As you’re well aware, tennis is an individual sport. There’s no coach or manager — or franchise owner — to put you on waivers.

You play as long as you’re able, as long as your body and your ego permit, which for Venus apparently is forever.

As long as tournaments want you in the field, and since on Wednesday Williams received a wild card for the U.S. Open in New York in a week and a half, they still do.

Yet about the same time the announcement of Williams’ gaining a place in the Open, she was losing a second-round match to Zheng Qinwen of China, 1-6, 6-2, 6-1. Losing is a generous description. She was crushed, Zheng took 11 straight games and 12 of the last 13. Venus is 43, and if she can accept defeat after years of success, maybe the rest of us should. Still, it hurts to watch the great ones in any sport get embarrassed. Venus has been at the top, and if she can handle the struggles perhaps, we ought to just grit our teeth.

There’s an emotional connection to Venus in Northern California where as a 14-year-old in October 1994 at what then was called Oakland Coliseum Arena, she had played and won her first pro match.

Younger sister Serena, who is retired, would surpass Venus and be more outspoken, but Venus had her viewpoints and her triumphs. One was in the 2005 Wimbledon final over Lindsay Davenport in three sets after saving a match point.

In what surely is ironic, Davenport was commenting for the Tennis channel on Venus Williams’ unfortunate one-sided defeat on Wednesday.

Williams kept making unforced errors against Zheng, who is 24th in the WTA rankings. Venus, not surprisingly, is far down, a victory last week for the first time in months. 

We do what we choose. Tennis is Venus’ life and has been. Not a bad one, either. Although these days it could be much, much better.

Rybakina, Sabalenka shine on a gray day at the BNP

INDIAN WELLS — The women finally got their time in the, well if there was any sun at the BNP Paribas Open, until it came late disguised as a big, gray blob of clouds for the Sunday final.

Which is yet another reminder you don’t know what you’ll get in weather or sports.

Aryna Sabalenka had never lost to Elena Rybakina. True they had played only four times, but perfection is perfection. And this winter Sabalenka virtually didn’t lose to anyone. 

She was an impressive 17-1 overall, a figure which would have made the good, old Warriors and eccentric New England Patriots envious.

You know where we’re going on this one, of course, Rybakina beat Sabalenka. It took a while, 2 hours, 3 minutes, and the score was 7-6 (11), 6-4. But now Rybakina has a victory over her nemesis as well as something no less significant, the 2022 Wimbledon title.

It definitely went right for her. And now the 24-year-old Sabalenka has the realization that when everything is going her way, as she observed Friday when the semifinal was delayed by an electrical problem at Indian Wells, it all could go wrong.

Everything definitely went well for Carlos Alcaraz in the men’s final that followed the ladies’ match. The day brightened, although it didn’t make you reach for the sunscreen, and the 19-year-old Alcaraz of Spain thumped Russia’s Daniil Medvedev, 6-3, 6-2.

The victory elevated Alcaraz to first in the men’s ranking. Sabalenka, the Belarusian, was aiming for the same position in the women’s, but the loss to Rybakina will keep her second until further competition.

 “A tough loss,” conceded Sabalenka, “but she played unbelievable tennis. I would say I didn’t serve great.

A big failing when the best part of your game is the serve.   

“She deserves it,” said Sabalenka, a good sport in a sport infamous for bad actors and actresses. “She’s a great player. Hopefully next time I will do a little bit better.”  

At that level, they’re all great players, all too capable of knocking you down and out. Only two days earlier, Iga Swiatek was beaten by Rybakina.

Tennis is a pastime of mobility and instability. One match you’re getting all the bounces and the net cord drops, the next you’re getting in a car to the airport. Only a few days ago Iga Swiatek, the ladies' top player (according to rankings), was moving past one opponent after another, unbeatable.  

Until Friday’s semis when she was defeated by the lady who was on her way to the trophy.  

The 23-year-old Rybakina was born in Moscow, as in Russia, but lists her home country as Kazakhstan. Her racquets don’t seem to mind.

“The important thing is the first set,” said Rybakina, emphasizing the obvious. She was down 4-2 quickly, but forced a tiebreaker that went, well if not as long as Isner-Nicolas Mahut in 2010 Wimbledon territory, but plenty long.

“We both had chances. In the end, it went my way.”

It turned out to be the winning way.

From Medvedev, no apology, no mercy

INDIAN WELLS — No apologies this time from Daniil Medvedev. In a way, no mercy either.

The guy with consecutive I’s in his first name is also the guy who’s now with 19 consecutive victories, the most recent over Frances Tiafoe, 7-6, 7-6 (4) Saturday in the semifinals of the BNP Paribas Open.

Medvedev, 27, a Russian although that hardly matters in a sport as international as tennis — he speaks English better than many Americans — is full of opinions if not necessarily himself.

He challenged the fans at the 2019 U.S. Open in New York. He whined about the playing surface in 2023 here at Indian Wells (later backing off and saying he had acted immaturely).

Sunday the challenge will be sporting, when in the final Medvedev faces Carlos Alcaraz, the 19-year-old U.S. Open champion, who in the second BNP semi, defeated Jannik Sinner, 7-6(4), 6-3.

A year ago, Medvedev, a former No. 1 and U.S. Open champion, was in a slump. Or a funk. Whatever, he was losing and the tennis folk were coming up with all sorts of reasons, not including the inescapable fact he had undergone hernia surgery.  

But as verified by his current streak that two weekends included a win over No. 1 Novak Djokovic in the Dubai final, his game is in full recovery.

Before the semi, Medvedev conceded he was in a zone — as if with a steak of almost  20 straight people would expect something else.

“First of all, I’m really happy to win. It was a crazy match even the ending, tough. I still feel not stressed, but it’s definitely better to win 7-5, 6-3, because then you get the energy level down. But I know how to go through it, so that’s not a problem.”

The only problem for Tiafoe, one of the young American stars, is that while he’s improved tremendously over the last two or three years, he is better than dozens of others on the circuit, he’s a notch behind people like Medvedev and Djokovic. And despite all the work and support, always may be.

The U.S. hasn’t had a Grand Slam champion since Andy Roddick in 2003. It did have an Indian Wells winner in 2022, Taylor Fritz, and a runner-up this year, Tiafoe.

Before the semi, Tiafoe pointed out, “The more you put yourself in position, the more you have the chances to win.”

This was another chance, but it ended up as Medvedev’s win. Not that he had escaped the pressure.  

“I mean it’s just another opportunity,” he said about making the final — repeating what seemingly every tennis player says about every match.

“The question is ‘Did I advance my position?’ Sometimes I do, sometimes I don’t.” 

Nineteen wins in a row have to be considered an advance. It’s hardly a regression.

Sabalenka was thinking: 'What could go wrong?'

INDIAN WELLS — The man on the microphone, which appeared to be the one piece of electronic equipment working correctly, kept asking for patience and telling us that everything would be fine, making it sound like we were waiting for a BART train and not a tennis match.

The buzzers and horns that let us know a ball might be long or wide, outside the lines were inoperative.

Minutes were clicking away. Five, 10, 15.

Up in the glass-walled media boxes, someone shouted, “They’ve kept score for a hundred years without electricity.”

The first two women’s semifinalists in BNP Paribas Open, Aryna Sabalenka and Maria Sakkari, couldn’t even walk across the court, never mind hitting a few warmup balls.

“For a second I was thinking, oops, something is going to go wrong today,” said Sabalenka. “It’s not going to be the same.”

Very little went wrong, if anything, on Friday for Sabalenka, who beat Sakkari 6-2, 6-3 as the tennis mavens choose to point out, book a place in the final.

In contrast, nothing seemingly went wrong for Iga Swiatek, the one at the top of the heap in women’s tennis. At least until Friday evening, when she was blitzed by Elena Rybackina, 6-2, 6-2.

That left Swiatek a bit bewildered and the writers and announcers understandably asking, how the heck did this happen?

“Well, I don’t know,” was Swiatek’s response. “Honestly, I feel like it’s more me and kind of my mistakes. For sure, Elena played great, and I feel like against her I have to play better.” 

Swiatek certainly did on Friday.

“I’m also not feeling 100 percent physically. I have a little discomfort in my rib, and we’re gonna consult with the medical team. For sure I’m going to use these days off before Miami (the next event), so now I actually have one more day.”

Both of last year’s Indian Well champs failed to get to the last step this time, Taylor Fritz losing in the quarters.

The way Sabalenka has been rolling her victory over Swiatek isn’t quite a shock. She’s 17-1 this year (the loss in Dubai stopped a 13-match win streak) and now is using her head as well as her booming serve.

“I wasn’t going for the lines,” said Sabalenka. “I’m not that good at tennis.”  

Some might argue with that idea. She was fine at keeping her cool after the delay.

“Stuff like that can happen,” said Sabalenka. “And I remind myself that’s OK. So I just have to calm myself and relax until they fix the system.”

Something different. 

“I understand now I can control myself in these situations. I can switch my focus and bring myself back. My goal is to keep winning.”

No matter what goes with the electronic scoring, or what doesn’t.

A day of a lot of tennis is too much for Fritz

INDIAN WELLS — That problem for Taylor Fritz, the town reminding him he was the defending champ in the BNP Paribas Open? It’s no longer around.

Neither is Fritz.  

Jannik Sinner, an Italian who moved from a possible career in skiing to a definite career in tennis, ousted Fritz, 6-4, 4-6, 6-2 Thursday in their quarterfinal at Indian Wells Tennis Garden.

You can debate whether it was an upset — Fritz was fifth in the ATP rankings, Sinner, 13th — there is no question for the fans shouting for the guy from southern California, it was a disappointment.

Whether you liked the results from this Thursday when the temperature would reach 72, you had the format and the entertainment.

The term March Madness has been copyrighted by the NCAA for another sport that uses nets and balls, so we’ll just refer to what was almost nine hours of activity as Racquet Revelry.

It began a good time before noon — you hate to describe matches involving the women’s Wimbledon champ and the No. 1 player in the women’s rankings — as warm up competition.

It closed after 8 p.m., not quite closing time around Palm Springs, but you’d better move quickly.

Elena Rybakina, who in July won Wimbledon, defeated Karolina Muchova, 7-6, 2-6, 6-4.

Then the sun set especially on ex-champ, Fritz.

Then, after the lights came on, Carlos Alcaraz, the No. 1 and also the Wimbledon champ, defeated the man who he had never previously beaten, Félix Auger-Aliassime, 6-4, 6-4.

Is that enough for you? It was more than enough for the 25-year-old Fritz, who was knocked out by a kid even younger, Sinner, who’s 21.

Asked if there was anything positive he could take from the match, Fritz said. “Not really. No, it’s a tough match. You know, I found a way to get back in it and into the third and got it back. I don’t know. I put myself in a decent chance to win, but in the end, I just couldn’t make it happen.”

Fritz said the wind, which often blows in the desert, increased in the afternoon which had an effect on the match.

“Obviously I wanted to keep going. I wanted to defend.”

And hear his friends and neighbors remind him he was a champion. 

Which he was.

Serena packs the place and keeps on going

Those commercials on ESPN, the ones that advise how sports bring enjoyment to our lives? They couldn't be more perfectly timed.

Yes, this has to do with Serena Williams.

She will be 41 in a few days. She’s a mother of one.

And on Friday she will be playing Ajla Tomljanović of Australia in the third round of a U.S. Open tennis tournament where some wondered if she could get past the first.

None of Serena’s opponents reminded us of Martina Navratilova or Chris Evert, but who cared? In the second round Wednesday, Williams upended the No. 2 seed, a tearful Anett Kontaveit of Estonia, 7-6 (4). 2-6, 6-2.

Of the 27,000 crammed into Arthur Ashe Stadium in New York, roughly 26,535 were screaming and hooting for Serena.

True, that’s unfair to Kontaveit, who despite having played the women’s tour for a decade (she’s 26) nobody but the tennis mavens know.

In a sport built as much on longevity as success, and where familiarity brings respect and endorsements, Williams has lasted. And triumphed over tough times, as well as those across the net.

Along with record ratings, that’s good enough for me. The pre-event hype has been overdone, if anything in Manhattan can be overdone. If you can make it there, go the lyrics, you’ll make it anywhere.

Serena Williams made it anywhere and everywhere. She followed older sister Venus, now 44 — and with whom she is teamed in doubles — from the mean streets of Compton, Calif., to make history.

The word retirement is not allowed in Serena’s presence. She’s not retiring from what will be her last Open and perhaps forever. She’s “evolving,” but however you want it labeled, she’s leaving.

Tennis will miss her. And judging from the promos, ESPN will miss her.  

The network built its campaign around Serena — and in the media, it wasn’t alone. One day, the New York Times’ digital section had three Williams stories, posted one after another.

Serena herself has remained as subdued and humble as is possible for a generational athlete. “It’s me, the same Serena,” she told the fans after her second-round win.

Not that we expected anyone else. At least until she retires, or, evolves.

“There’s still a little battle left in me,” she said. That battle is the essence of Serena Williams. When failing in other matches. Mary Jo Fernandez, a former player now commenting for ESPN, said Williams had the ability to serve herself out of trouble.

When Fernandez asked after the Kontaveit match, “Are you surprising yourself with your level of play?” Serena responded, “I’m just Serena, you know.
“

We do know. As Tiger Woods, Williams was capable of coming up with the right shot when it was needed. 

This Open, baseball is nearing the playoffs and college football is starting. Serena has been needed fo jack up interest and fill seats.

Some optimists, after the first two rounds, also picked her to win.

For certain, she can’t lose. Nor can tennis.

Thoughts on Serena and the changes in sport

The changes in life are magnified in sport, where someone new inevitably moves in while the one we knew and recognized — if not idolized — departs.

Maybe, as in the case of Serena Williams, making us consider our own impermanence as much as hers.

Wasn’t it only yesterday that Serena was the kid straight out of Compton, the younger of two wildly talented sisters? Now, with a kid of her own and well aware her best days as a tennis player are in the past, she has made a decision that may be any sporting heroine’s most difficult.

To say goodbye to the game that has been so much a part of her existence.

At least she made it herself. As opposed to Jed Lowrie. His career as a major league ballplayer may not have been as spectacular as Serena’s in tennis, but it was long, 11 years, and solid, particularly in various seasons with the Oakland Athletics.

Apropos of nothing but pertinent to so much, on Thursday the A’s designated Lowrie for assignment, in effect telling him he no longer could do what was required — less than a week since Serena, in an article for Vogue, told us the same thing about herself.

At 40 and after months recovering from a hamstring injury, Williams sensed she never would get another Grand Slam, much less any other victory. She spoke of a light at the end of the tunnel. What could be called the greatest career in women’s tennis will come to a halt at the upcoming U.S. Open.

Lowrie’s career surely already is at the end, although someone might pick him up as an emergency backup. Lowrie was hitting .180 in 50 games this season.

“It’s just the nature of the game,” said Lowrie, a consummate professional. “I kind of figured it was coming. So yeah, it wasn’t based on some conversations I’ve had. So yeah, it wasn’t a surprise.”

Is anything a surprise anymore?

The last couple of months seem to have been particularly depressing with the deaths of two icons, Bill Russell and Vin Scully, and now the retirement of another, Serena Williams. So much so quickly.

We are the victims and the beneficiaries of the modern world, of television and the internet. We saw Russell make history, heard Scully describe it. These people were not merely champions or announcers, they became family.

As the years pass, all we can do is appreciate the chance to realize what we had — and to hope there might be another Serena (or Bill Russell or Vin Scully) in the future.

Tennis thrives on oddballs, not bullies

WIMBLEDON, England — You want a sport of oddballs, characters, there’s baseball, Jim Piersall running the bases backwards. Or there’s tennis. Ilie Nastase was known as “Nasty” for more reasons than his given name.

Both games are virtually timeless. And what is tennis but hitting a ball back and forth across a net? Yawn.

Which is where Nick Kyrgios enters, and apparently from the comments, also entered Stefanos Tsitsipas’ head.

There was history the past 24 hours, although maybe not the sort you would expect at the All England Lawn Tennis and Croquet Club.

Alas, it was the official termination or Middle Sunday. Yes, there have been rounds on four other Sundays since the club was created in the 1870s (and I was here for all four), but they were makeup calls, as it were, replacements for rainouts.

The Middle Sunday break gives a day off to both the grass courts, already turning a bit yellow, and the residents of Wimbledon, Borough of Merton, who live full-time in the area. It was a glorious tradition. But as is the case with so many other traditions, it fell victim to television revenue.

On this Sunday, Frances Tiafoe, the 24-year-old from Maryland, fell victim to the Belgian David Goffin, 7-6 (3), 5-7, 5-7, 6-4, 7-5.

The match went 4 hours, 36 minutes, the first set 70 minutes. Unlike Kyrgios’ win over Tsitsipas 24 hours earlier, there was respect and high praise from both sides.

“It was an unbelievable match,” said Tiafoe. “We both definitely left it out there.”

Contrast those comments with those from Tsitsipas, who condemned his opponent as a bully.

Wow. We’ve heard Kyrgios described as a jokester. As a goofball. As an entertainer. Even as a pest. But a bully? What did he do to take a couple of backhand swipes at his Greek foe, rather than the ball?

“It’s constant bullying,” was the Tsitspas contention. That sounds like something you’d hear in a third-grade class, not from a first-class tennis player.

He said Kyrgios had an evil side. “He was probably the bully in school. I don’t like bullies.”

He doesn’t like losing either, and a third-round defeat in what some say is the biggest tournament of any year must have been particularly disappointing. But griping is unneeded.

“I’m not sure how I bullied him,” said Kyrgios. “He was the one hitting balls at me.”

That’s a longtime tactic in tennis. But it goes with the territory, doesn’t it? You have to place shots where the other guy can’t handle them.

Tennis thrives on controversy. John McEnroe, Jimmy Connors, Serena Williams hollered and played their way into our thoughts. Serena’s blowup with the chair umpire in the 2018 U.S. Open lives on. Of course, screaming doesn’t equal or surpass winning.

That’s part of the reason for the outbursts from McEnroe.

Connors and Serena received so much attention. They won Grand Slam tournaments, Williams all four. Kyrgios still is trying to win one. But if nothing else, he did outlast Tsitsipas.

“Apart from me just going back and forth to the umpire,” Kyrgios said, “I did nothing against Steph.

“But I’d be pretty upset too if I lost to someone two weeks in a row. Maybe he should figure out how to beat me a couple more times and then we can talk.”

Bully that.

Plaque still at Wimbledon, and so is Isner

WIMBLEDON, England — The plaque remains at Wimbledon, and three rounds into this year’s tournament so does John Isner. Not that he won’t always have a presence here, as much in myth as memory.

He is 37 now. Isner, nearing the end of a career that has produced highlights — that plaque? Wimbledon doesn’t celebrate the ordinary — but never a Grand Slam championship.

That glorious reward remained a possibility, albeit a distant one. But if you’re in the draw, and Isner definitely is, facing the young Italian Jannik Sinner on Friday, anything can happen.

After all, on Wednesday Isner, as always his billed cap turned backwards like he was a baseball catcher, stunned both Andy Murray and an almost obnoxiously but understandably one-sided crowd at Centre Court with a 6-4, 7-6, 6-7, 6-4 victory.

“I did some good things,” Isner said in summary. One of those was defeating Murray for the first time in nine matches.

As pointed out, in a sport where it’s one person against another head to head and shots that normally clear the net miss it by inches, anything can happen.

So much of life is timing. As is so much of tennis. Isner is 6-foot-9, as one might suppose able to angle and power serves (as much as 157 mph, they say) out of sight.

If he had arrived at Wimbledon in the early 1980s, when grass court tennis was a serve-and-volley competition, when Boris Becker and Stefan Edberg were boring and impressing us, who knows how many titles he might have won?

But the pooh-bahs decided there had to be an ace and a reason for ground strokes. So the famed lawns at Wimbledon and the balls both were redone. Sure, there still are aces, but there also are drop shots, and when the guy on the other side of the net is as tall as an NBA center, you hit low and keep your hopes high.

Isner, who grew up in North Carolina where basketball reigns, went to Georgia to play tennis, and could hit the serves and overheads, if never the jackpot, although he was a Wimbledon semifinalist in 2018.

Not that his victory over Murray wasn’t important. Isner called it the top of the list. Murray achieved godlike status in 2012 when he became the first Brit (Murray is a Scot) to win Wimbledon in 77 years. Then he won it again.

“I’m not the player he is,” Isner said of Murray. Whatever, he was enough of a player against Murray, who admittedly has been fighting his way back after hip surgery.

“Yeah, I played in my mind incredibly well,” said Isner. “Of course I served well, but I was thinking outside of my serve I did some good things. Of course, I didn’t win many baseline rallies with Andy, but I think I did what I needed to get a (service) break in the first and fourth set.

“My serve carried me from there.”

It was the 2010 Wimbledon in which Isner had his greatest effect on the game and event in an affair of fate, fable and exhaustion. He faced Nicolas Mahut, another spectacular server.

Play started on a Monday (opening day) and ended on Wednesday. Serve. Ace. Serve. No return. Ad infinitum. But fascinating and historical. A 6-4, 3-6, 6-7, 7-6, 70-68 win. A plaque on the brick wall, “The longest match was played on court 18…”

A plaque removed and replaced. A revision in the rules of fifth-set tie-breakers. A disenchantment.

“That’s all I ever get asked about,” said Isner.

Of course.