Within months, golf and tennis lose their main men

August 17, 2021 by Art Spander in articles, tennis

The story was less a surprise than a disappointment. Roger Federer will undergo another knee operation.

The career of the most popular man in tennis may be finished. Only a few months after an accident surely put an end to the career of the most popular man in golf, Tiger Woods.

Two sports dependent on personalities losing their prime personalities, virtually at the same time. Ironic. Unfortunate.

They had slipped, but not from our memories. Or in the TV ratings. Federer won 20 Grand Slams, more than 100 tournaments. Tiger won 15 majors, 82 tournaments.

Woods is 45, Federer just 40. Once they were linked not only by greatness but by commerce, each wearing attire with the Nike logo until Federer switched two years ago to Uniqlo. Woods at times would attend Federer’s matches.

Now neither is able to play, and we are left with the question whether they’ll ever be able to play, other than in an exhibition.

We know that nothing, and no one, lasts forever. The history books and media guides are reminders. We grow up hearing and reading about legends, Babe Ruth, Bill Tilden, Johnny Unitas, maybe Rod Laver, who just turned 83 and is the last man to win the true Grand Slam, all four majors in a single calendar.

But there’s a special connection to those we’ve watched and cheered, if only silently, as they performed. Arnold Palmer may have made tournament golf the game it would become, but over most of the past 30 years Woods was the man.

Just as, starting in 2001 when he defeated Pete Sampras at Wimbledon, Federer was the man, as popular in Britain as any English player.

The late Bill Veeck, who owned the St. Louis Browns (he once ordered 3-foot-7 Eddie Gaedel sent up to bat) and understood how to get people in the park, said, “If you had to depend on baseball fans for support you’d be out of business by Mother’s Day.”

Veeck had a gimmick, a midget. Tennis and golf had figurative giants, players even somebody who didn’t know a bogey from a birdie or a double fault from the San Andreas Fault would recognize.

Roger Federer got you headlines and viewers — and ticket sales.

Sure, there are other top players, Novak Djokovic, the current world’s No. 1; Rafael Nadal, who along with Djokovic and Federer has 20 Slams. But they weren’t the same as Roger.

Federer didn’t mention the “R” word, retirement, but from what he told the New York Times in discussing what lays ahead, the future is hazy at best.

“I will be on crutches for many weeks and also out of the game for many months,” Federer said. “It’s going to be difficult of course in some ways, but at the same time I know it’s the right thing to do.

“Because I want to be running around later as well again, and I want to give myself a glimmer of hope also to return to the tour in some shape. I am realistic, don’t get me wrong. I know how difficult it is at this age right now to do another surgery and try it, but look, I want to be healthy.”

The health of tennis may be in question, not at the Slams but at tournaments such as the BNP Paribas at Indian Wells, where Federer usually was as entrant at an event he described as one of his favorites.

Change is a constant in sport, and there always are dozens of talented athletes capable of becoming a winner. Yet only a very few have the magic to make us care.

Tiger and Roger did, and now they’re not playing.

For Federer and his fans, disappointment and doubt

July 07, 2021 by Art Spander in articles, tennis

When the Open Championship was held at Royal St. George’s in 1949 a golfer named Harry Bradshaw found his ball inside a broken beer bottle on the fifth fairway. He tried to play it. He could have had a free drop,

When the Open was held at St. George’s in 2011, a golfer named Tiger Woods couldn’t find his ball off the first fairway after the opening shot of the tournament. Woods only wished he could have had a free drop instead of a lost-ball penalty.

The Open starting Thursday returns to St. George’s where you can see France some 20 miles across the Channel but when in competition, you’re thrashing around in the rough you can’t see a way to make par.

And, no, Bradshaw didn’t win in ’49, It was the legendary Bobby Locke. Nor did Tiger win in ’11, It was the not-so-legendary Ben Curtis.

The last Open at the course named for the patron saint of England was in 2011 and won by Darren Clarke, whose celebration after years of trying included his obligatory cigars and some optional pints.

Clarke, a Northern Irishman, who’s as popular as the game he still plays on the Champions (seniors) Tour.

Phil Mickelson was second that ‘11 Open, and now 10 years later, in May, having taken the PGA at 50 to become the oldest man ever to win a major, he’s still a factor.

The favorites, however, are the usual suspects; Jon Rahm, who won the U, S. Open, at Torrey Pines in June; the feuding friends, Bruce Koepka, and Bryson DeChambeau; Rory McIlroy, despite his unsteady driving; and Justin Thomas.

But so often at the Open—this is the 149th--the story’s the course, scraped and molded from the linksland of the British Isles,

St. George’s is a place where off the fourth tee there’s a bunker big enough to hide the whole lot of the Queen’s fusiliers and where canines and human females used to be treated with contempt.

It’s nestled among dunes on which Caesar’s army set foot but Hitler’s army never was able.

Ian Fleming, a member, picked up many of his story ideas behind the bar. He carried a handicap of 007—well 7.

When the wind blows (when doesn’t it blow?) St. George’s might be the toughest course in the Open rotation. Unquestionably it is the southernmost.

In the 1981 Open (won by the Texan, Bill Rogers) Jack Nicklaus shot an 83 in the second round and still made the cut. In the ’85 Open there (won by Sandy Lyle) Peter Jacobsen tackled a streaker on the 18th green. In1993 Greg Norman played so well the final round he proclaimed, “I’m not one to brag, but I was in awe of myself.”

There are several courses squeezed in the area known for decades as Cinque Ports, not far from the White Cliffs of Dover, One, Prince’s, is alongside St. George’s, only a small stone wall separating the two.

The third round of the ’93 Open, the late Payne Stewart saw several sportswriters he knew, playing Prince’s, stopped next to the wall and asked, “Anybody see my ball, a Pink Lady?”

He wasn’t serious.

But Bernard Darwin, the London Times golf writer, in the 1920s and ‘30s, was serious when he wrote about St. George’s, “The sun shines on the waters of Pegwell Bay and lighting up the white cliffs in the distance; this is nearly my idea of heaven as it is to be attained on any earthly links.”

Others may have disagreed. Once, outside St. George’s there was a sign, “No dogs, no women.” Ladies now are able to play although only by themselves.

Wonder what James Bond would say?In the old cartoons, Bugs Bunny, Elmer Fudd, the message scrolled on the screen. “The end,” it said, and so it was time to leave.

If only it could be that clear in sports.

If only Roger Federer and his fans wouldn’t have to endure the disappointment and doubt.

If only we wouldn’t be wondering whether one of the great careers in tennis was headed to a finish.

Which it certainly seemed to be Wednesday, when Federer was defeated — in truth, overwhelmed — 6-3, 7-6 (4), 6-0, by Hubert Hurkacz of Poland, who except to tennis purists probably is as obscure as Federer is famous.

Or was obscure until his Wimbledon quarterfinal rout of Federer.

What a sad, jarring few days for two of the game’s stars. Venus Williams, age 41, couldn’t win a game in the final set she played. Federer, age 39 (a week away from 40), also couldn’t win a game the final set he played.

It’s not supposed to be that way. Or is it? The world, we were told poetically by T.S. Eliot, ends with a whimper. An appropriate description of Federer’s play the last game or the last set.

Chris Clarey wrote in the New York Times that Federer was “shanking forehands and misjudging volleys.” Roger Federer, eight-time Wimbledon singles champion, so graceful and mobile, shanking and misjudging?

This could not be. But it was.

Like Willie Mays in the season he was with the Mets, dropping flies and striking out, Federer was a victim of time as much as he was of the opposing players.

He’s not going to retire. Tennis is his life as well as his profession. “The goal is to play, of course,” he said.

But even he was uncertain about a return to Wimbledon in 2022. “I don’t know,” he said. “I don’t really know. I’ve got to regroup.”

What he does know, what we all know, is that age is the ultimate winner in every sport.

Our games are for the young, as Federer was when at 19 he knocked off Pete Sampras at Wimbledon in 2001. As is Hurkacz at 24 when he knocked off Federer.

The days keep moving, the forehands keep flying. Don’t look over your shoulder. Everyone may be gaining on you.

Federer had a decent tournament, all things considered. Until the third game against Hurkacz.

Roger underwent a knee operation a year ago and weeks of rehabilitation. That he even was able to advance to the quarters this Wimbledon could be considered a victory.

Unfortunately, there was that third game, Hurkacz pitching the shutout as it were, only the third incurred by Federer in 429 Grand Slam matches.

“The last few games,” Federer admitted in his media conference, “obviously you can feel that you’re not coming back from it.

“I’m not used to that kind of situation, obviously, very much, especially not here.”

Yet assuming he returns to Wimbledon — and the guess is he will, if only to revise the last impression; who wants to remember Roger getting skunked? — he may have to get used to it.

The older you get, the younger — and stronger — are the people on the other side of the net.

Of course, young or old, how many tennis players were as brilliant or elegant as Federer, the 20 Wimbledon titles, the 103 ATP singles wins?

Although he is Swiss, Federer came to be idolized by the British fans, probably because of his classy style as well as his success at their tournament.

“I’m actually very happy I made it as far as I did here,” he said diplomatically, “and I actually was able to play at the level that I did after everything I went through.”

What he went through in that final game was awful. For him and his many fans.

Venus wants more matches, not more questions

June 30, 2021 by Art Spander in articles, tennis

Venus Williams always was the quiet one, the protective one, the classic older sister. Serena Williams could give us some great comments as well as great tennis, but Venus was measured in her remarks.

We’ll never really know what she thinks about her slide from the top.

At age 41, what Venus wants is another match, not another question about growing old. However, she can’t have one without the other.

Serena is a five-part drama. She shouts at chair umpires, swears at linespeople and even unintentionally becomes the prima donna, as she did on Tuesday, when in her Wimbledon first-round match she slipped, injured a hamstring and was forced to withdraw.

A day later, almost unnoticed, in part because of her personality, in part because of the decline of her game, Venus was defeated — crushed actually — 7-5, 6-0, by the rising young Tunisian, Ons Jabeur.

Bageled in the second set, as the tennis people say about getting blanked. How depressing. At least to us, if not to Venus.

“She has nothing to prove,” was the observation that Chris Evert made on ESPN about Williams. Quite true, and quite historical. In an earlier era, it was Evert who dropped from the top — and when asked why she continued on tour said something like, there’s nothing wrong with being third.

Not at all, but these days, Venus Williams isn’t third. Or 13th. When she won her Wimbledon opener on Monday, it was the first time in a year she’s made it to the second round of a Grand Slam.

You rarely know what a great athlete is thinking as the end nears, especially in an individual sport such as tennis where there’s no GM or coach to push you out the door.

A champion tennis player may not hurt herself by continuing to compete, but she will hurt her fans. And her image.

They were involved in different sports, but Willie Mays, Joe Namath and Johnny Unitas were almost embarrassments in their final seasons. You hated to suffer through games.

You wonder if it bothers the athlete as much as it does the people who watch him or her?

Indeed, it’s often a group of sportswriters or announcers — who never retire — calling on the athlete to step away.

Once I asked Joe Montana why he kept playing, “You can retire and return to your work,” he replied. “When I retire, it’s over.”

Besides, sports are what they know and where they made their living and reputation. You’ve heard athletes, football players particularly, say that nothing replaced the feeling of playing the game.

More athletes are staying longer, and please don’t pester them. Even when somewhat surprisingly, as was the situation with Venus for ESPN, they consent to talk. And not say much.

“I’ve done a thousand interviews,” Williams insisted, “and now only the truth comes out.”

Venus was a 14-year-old when in October 1994, at what then was called Oakland Coliseum Arena, she played her first pro match, defeating Shaun Stafford. There have been dozens of other victories, seven in Grand Slams, through the years. Also, as Venus noted, dozens of questions.

Which is why, as is the case with her tennis, she goes through a well-practiced routine, full of cliches such as “You can’t win them all.”

In the ESPN bit, when Chris McKendry asked, “What’s the key to your longevity?” Venus replied, “I’m tired of talking about it.”

Chris Evert interrupted and joked, “How’s your love life?” “I’m very single,” said Venus. “I might be available, actually.”

Evert added, “You and me both.”

Venus is very available as a player and apparently will be for some time, despite the losses and age.

Federer, Serena both upset; was it age or opponent?

May 18, 2021 by Art Spander in articles, tennis

Time often is the athlete’s friend. The longer a game or a match or a tournament goes on, the better the chances of the favorite. Yet, as the years go by, time, the pal, the benefactor, becomes the enemy.

As surely it was Tuesday for the best tennis players of their time — arguably of all time — Roger Federer and Serena Williams.

In Geneva in his homeland, Switzerland — where he never loses — Federer was beaten 6-4. 4-6. 6-4 by Pablo Andujar of Spain.

You could say that Federer missed much of the 2020 season after two knee surgeries. You could say that Federer had not played since losing in Doha in March. You could say that the match was on clay, Federer’s least favorite surface.

You also could say that Federer is 39, which happens to be the same age as Serena, who in Parma, Italy, was stunned, 7-5 (4), 6-2, by somebody named Katarina Sinakova.

Williams was in the Emilia-Romagna Open as a wild-card invitee, after losing her opening match in the Italian Open in Rome. Along with Federer, she is preparing for the French Open (or if you prefer, Roland Garros), which starts May 30.

There are upsets, if rarely in the early rounds, and there are indications. Federer, with his record 20 Slams, and Serena, with her near-record 23, are not the players they once were and never will be again. It’s one thing to lose to Stan Wawrinka or Andy Murray. It’s another to lose to Pablo Andujar, ranked 78th (Federer is 8th).

Maybe Serena and Roger will accept their declining play without regret — Chris Evert said in her mind there was nothing wrong with being third in the world after Ranking No. 1 — but can we?

Does their popularity linger, or do the fans and the media, out of obligation, seek other choices?

Change is inevitable in sport, in life. Age brings injury — Federer was able to stay healthy for so long, but for him, as with others, pounding shots, catching flights, the body wears down.

You’re the king or the queen, but there’s always some new kid hovering over your shoulder.

Once, when things were tough, when losing seemed probable, Serena would power one of those monster serves or Federer could come up with a beautiful passing shot.

That’s why they were great. That’s why the people on the other side of the net ended up in awe and in defeat.

After beating Federer, Andujar, a 35-year-old from Spain, was as much in disbelief as in elation. “It’s amazing,” said Andujar. ”I still cannot believe it.”

A year or three ago, none of us would have believed it. But this is now, 2021, and Roger Federer is battling himself as much as his opponents.

He understands what he’s up against. The confidence ebbs as the years multiply, not that Roger and Serena would make that admission.

“It’s good to be back on the court,” Federer said candidly, “but then you lost a match like this, and you’re down. It never feels great. I was looking forward to playing here. No doubt about it. But this is a press conference where I have to explain why and how it all happened.”

That’s the price that champions pay. And no question, it’s much harder to explain why you lose than how you won — especially after all those wins, more than 100.

Serena had the same problem, telling us what was wrong, particularly since what was wrong may be as simple and unescapable as getting older.

Until now, she only got better.

Osaka gets better, Serena gets older

February 18, 2021 by Art Spander in articles, tennis

The tears told us more than Serena Willams’ words. She had been asked after what we might consider a momentous, if unsurprising defeat, whether this was it.

Whether the way she touched her heart as she strode sadly across the surface of Rod Laver Arena was a sign that, half a year from her 40th birthday, it was time to retire — from the Australian Open, if not tennis.

Her response in oh-so-many words was classic Serena, a blend of defiance and acceptance. This lady did not become the best women’s tennis player ever — and who cares if Margaret Court has one more Grand Slam victory than Williams? — because she gave in easily.

The hope was that Williams, two nights ago, would defeat Naomi Osaka and advance to the Aussie Open finals. It was a false hope. Osaka is 23. She keeps getting better (yes, in that chaotic win over Williams in the 2018 U.S. Open, Osaka was just 21).

Serena keeps getting older.

We’re all victims of Father Time. That’s sports. That’s life, really, but we notice it more in the athletes. One day you’re the new kid. In the blink of an eye you’re a veteran, looking over your shoulder or across the net.

Serena losing to someone 16 years her junior is no sin. Nor is it any fun, no matter how much you’ve accomplished. Athletes are taught never to quit, never to concede. A Tom Brady may keep going, but he is rare.

Venus Williams kept getting knocked out in the opening rounds of Slams, until a victory in the first round of this Australian Open. Some would choose a less tortuous path.

Who knows about Serena? She’s a wife and a mother. She’s also a competitor.

The tennis player who decides immediately following a loss, no matter how unexpected or enervating, is rare. Nobody wants that stinging defeat to be the final line in their resume.

A day before the Osaka-Williams match, the sports talk show conversations were consistent. On ESPN’s “Pardon The Interruption,” both Michael Wilbon and Tony Kornheiser said they were pulling for Serena but expected Osaka to win.

Williams lacked her primary weapon, the devastating serve. Our bodies change. Our styles change. Maybe the serve will be there another day. Most likely it will. This was the day she needed it, and she didn’t have it.

The years and the tournaments go past. Serena’s last Grand Slam triumph was the 2017 Australian. Four years and a lifetime ago, Osaka was a kid. Now she’s a champion.

As is Serena. She has the 23 Slams. The question was, could she add one more? You know the answer.

"Today was not the ideal outcome or performance, but it happens," Williams wrote in her post after the match.

Athletes have a tendency to think the results will get better, especially when for years they were better.

"I am so honored to be able to play in front of you all,” she posted. “Your support, your cheers, I only wish I could have done better for you today. I am forever in debt and grateful to each and every single one of you. I love you. I love you. I love you. I adore you."

What she doesn’t love is the negative questions from the media, which doesn’t make her any different from the rest.

"I don't know if I’d ever tell when I’m going to retire,” she said with some agitation. Then she walked away, and left the press conference, insisting, "I'm done.”

At least for now.

Wimbledon loses out to the coronavirus

April 01, 2020 by Art Spander in articles, tennis

By Art Spander

Another announcement. Another disappointment. No Wimbledon. No tennis on the lawns of the All-England Club.

No kidding.

The coronavirus was the winner this year, in straight sets. John McEnroe would have shouted, “You can’t be serious.” Oh, but we are. Sadly.

Ask anyone hunkered down, waiting, hoping, unsure of what will happen next — in sports, in life — worrying about a protein molecule that has hospitals overflowing and our world a mess.

No Wimbledon. No Final Four. Probably no U.S. Open or Masters. Maybe no British Open. The NBA perhaps running into August, if it restarts — and suddenly the optimism of Mavericks owner Mark Cuban, who was talking about mid-May, has been dimmed.

Major League baseball perhaps running into Decemeber. If it starts at all.

Hard to complain about what’s not happening in sport when you read and hear what is happening in society.

In normal times, the predictions would be about Roger Federer’s chance for another title. Now they’re about how many people will fall victim to the coronavirus.

Our patterns have been altered, our template shattered.

George Vecsey, the retired New York Times sports columnist, had a book, “A Year in the Sun,” a title that, if not literally accurate, described our sports writing culture. From event to event, across the calendar.

So many places, so many games, and so few that through tradition and location stand out — the Rose Bowl, the Super Bowl, the Masters and, because it’s very name is so instantly recognizable, Wimbledon.

“Devastated,” was Federer’s one-word tweet, when the 2020 tournament, as the British say, was abandoned. His sentiment is understood. For more than a decade, Wimbledon was Roger’s tournament. He won it eight times and believed he could add another.

However, Federer is growing older. At the next Wimbledon, 2021, he’ll be a month from his 40th birthday. His time is ebbing away. The same for Serena Williams, who has won the tournament seven times. She’ll be 40 in September 2021.

So unfortunate for Roger. For Serena. For the kid who didn’t get to play in the NCAA tournament. For all the athletes whose careers have been affected by something beyond their control, beyond our control.

How barren the sports landscape. No basketball, baseball, soccer, golf. Now, nothing.

Two months ago, they held the Super Bowl, which was followed by the AT&T Pebble Beach Pro-Am, which was followed by the Genesis L.A. Open. Spring training was underway, just like always. We were loving it.

Then what didn’t come to a halt became a sad apology.

"It is with great regret that the Main Board of the All-England Club (AELTC) and the Committee of Management of The Championships have today decided that The Championships 2020 will be cancelled due to public health concerns linked to the coronavirus epidemic," Wimbledon said on Wednesday, in a statement on its website.

"Uppermost in our mind has been the health and safety of all of those who come together to make Wimbledon happen — the public in the UK and visitors from around the world, our players, guests, members, staff, volunteers, partners, contractors, and local residents — as well as our broader responsibility to society's efforts to tackle this global challenge to our way of life."

There had been talk about holding the tournament without spectators, as there have been suggestions that NBA games end English Premier League games and baseball games be held without fans, in empty stadiums or arenas. But why?

The people who watch, who cheer, who queue for seats at Wimbledon, who wait to give high fives to Steph Curry as he leaves the court, are as much a part of a sport as those who play. Think Rafael Nadal would scramble up the seats after a win at Wimbledon if there were nobody waiting to hug him?

The virus won this time, in straight sets. Wimbledon never had a chance. It was unfair. But as have been reminded of late, so is life.

Nadal: ‘One of the most emotional nights of my career’

September 08, 2019 by Art Spander in articles, tennis