See you at De Country Club, Rafa.
"Of all the instruction books out there, this is clearly one of the newest." - Pete Sampras
-
Recent Posts
Archives
Categories
Meta
Parsing P-Mac
"It's halftime at the USTA. We're getting ready for a big comeback. Just don't expect any of us to drive a Chrysler."
Several weeks ago, Wayne Bryan – tennis coach, dad, and cheerleader – sent a lengthy, critical open letter to the USTA. He essentially characterized the organization’s player development program as being a rudderless money pit. The attention Bryan’s attack drew in the tennis blogosphere caused other notables to chime in. Former USTA coach and Top 10 player, Tim Mayotte, backed Bryan’s disappointment with a post on Johan Kriek’s Facebook page (the natural spot for such a missive). It got so Patrick McEnroe, GM of player development, felt the need to fire back. Below are some the highlights of McEnroe’s rebuttal, with added interpretation.
“It’s easy—and frankly, it’s long been fashionable—to cast a blanket indictment against the USTA. That’s neither new nor notable. I think all of us at the USTA would agree that a lot of past criticism has been deserved, but Mr. Bryan’s scattershot attack is so full of holes, hearsay, and half-truths that I feel compelled to address it.”
If you’re going to say we suck, at least do us the courtesy of being accurate as to why we suck.
“As General Manager of Player Development, my specific charge is to help produce more Top 100 players with the goal that we have more of them competing into the second week of the majors.”
This is the Moneyball approach, people. If we start getting players on base, maybe a few will actually score.
“Let’s face it, in a rapidly-changing global environment, if we’re not changing and moving forward, we’re essentially going backward.”
I’m pretty sure I stole that from Steve Jobs. Or maybe it was a Sprint commercial. No wait, it came with my dumplings from Schezuan Village.
“It’s true that Americans don’t dominate tennis the way they once did, but the truth is that because of globalization, Americans don’t dominate any sport the way they once did.”
When’s the last time we won a World Cup?
“Tennis has often been criticized for being too expensive and inaccessible. Those criticisms have truth to them; they are challenges that all of us involved in the sport face.”
But I think we can all agree it’s nice to keep the “undesirables” away if you know what I mean.
“The idea that the more-talented or more-accomplished kids are somehow being held back or hampered by the rule changes that include shorter courts, properly-sized racquets and slower-bouncing balls is absurd.”
That’s clearly the fault of USTA coaching. Duh.
“Mr. Bryan says he can produce, “all kinds of kids around the country at 8, 9, 10 who can flat out nail the ball.” I’m sure that’s true, and in fact, I’ve seen plenty of them at our Regional Training Centers and our three USTA training centers.”
And by “seen” them I mean I’ve seen clips of them playing on YouTube. My broadcast schedule is a bitch.
“It’s equally important to note that the ability to “flat-out nail the ball” doesn’t exactly translate into a bright future as a player.”
It might even lead to a meth habit.
“Jose Higueras, USTA Player Development’s outstanding Director of Coaching, often has said that this country has produced plenty of players who can hit the ball, but far fewer who understand how to play tennis.”
Even far fewer who understand what the hell he’s saying half the time.
“Mr. Bryan likes to point out that the USTA has never developed a Top 10 player. I would ask him, “Who has, from start-to-finish?””
Seriously. Help me out. Bollettieri? Lansdorp? Who? Throw me a bone.
“Whatever the scenario, whatever the need, we’re there to lend our support to both the coach and the player so that the player can progress.”
And, of course, share in some of the credit. (Wildcards don’t just fall from the sky).
“Mr. Bryan suggests that the USTA’s thrust is to “get rid of the influence of parents and local coaches.” Again, that’s absolutely absurd.”
We very much need these people to give players transportation to our tournaments and pay their membership dues.
“Indeed, the amount of time that we spend annually meeting with and exchanging ideas with private coaches is off the charts.”
In all my written correspondence I always give a tip of the cap to Casey Kasem. Keep your feet on the ground and keep reaching for the stars? Pure inspiration.
“Just last year, USTA Player Development conducted 57 camps at our Regional Training Centers, where we were able to touch thousands of kids, parents and coaches.”
No racquets. No balls. Just lots of hugging and sharing feelings.
“As in most criticism aimed at the USTA, Mr. Bryan is fond of citing the “massive staff expenditures” of this association. Yes, we’re extremely fortunate to have the revenues generated by the US Open to help us fund our programs and hire talented people, but to hear Mr. Bryan tell it, you’d think our water coolers were filled with Dom Perignon.”
That would be idiotic; the bubbly would go flat as Tang. No, our coolers are stocked with wine from the USTA’s private vineyard. (Good luck finding that on our 990).
“I make a very nice living—I don’t apologize for that either.”
But I do thank my brother like crazy. If not for him, I’d be Jay Berger.
“But the truth is that a lot of my very talented staff take less money to work for USTA Player Development than they could make if they took their talents elsewhere.”
Like the PR lacky who wrote this letter for me in between taking my kids to school and buying my wife a Valentine’s Day gift. Hey, it’s not my fault Ketchum isn’t hiring.
“Mr. Bryan bemoans the fact that I’ve hired some foreign coaches; he decries the fact that none of my coaches have children that are champion players. Frankly, I’m offended by the former and amused by the latter.”
It really is hilarious how bad our coaches’ kids are. Bunch of spazzes.
“I still recall the best coaching advice my father ever gave me as a junior—after splitting the first two sets of my match, he told me prior to the third set to, “do what you did in the set that you won.””
I rolled a bagel in the third. I can’t tell you how many times I used that one with Roddick in Davis Cup.
“I understand a lot of the criticism and I’m happy to take most of it—where it’s constructive and where it’s deserved. The buck stops here. Certainly, when Americans don’t fare well on our sport’s biggest stages, nobody is calling the local pros—they’re calling the USTA. And they should.”
Ask for Lorraine. We’re paying her $600k to field complaints. But only Tuesdays and Thursdays.
A Nelly Olson Australian Open
I’m still thinking about the Australian Open. While exciting at times, was there really much that we haven’t seen before? In fact, it felt a little bit of a tournament Nellie Olson would have loved; a “See, i told you so” kind of event.
I told you Samantha Stosur would lose again
Is Stosur the Frankenstein to Amelie Mauresmo’s Tarzan and Jennifer Capriati’s Tonto? After losing for the umpteenth time at her home slam, Stosur sounded downright Mauresmo about the whole thing. Only Capriati really gave a glimpse into her disappointment.
Said Stosur after her loss to Sorana Cirstea: “Yeah, there’s not any other word for it but a total disappointment.”
Said Mauresmo after losing to Jana Kandarr in 2001: “It is one of my greatest disappointments.”
Said Capriati after losing to Elena Dementieva: “I mean, of course when I came off the court, you know, I just felt like the whole world was coming down on me. You know, just my heart was being ripped out.”
(in Aussie accent) I'm standing on a puddle of piss
ChampagneUhhhhhhhhhhhh (sound of her grunt)
I told you the Australian Open is better than the US Open
What’s with these trophy photo ops? Someone, anyone please find a stylist and a location scout pronto! At least Azarenka got some champagne and didn’t have to look like Raggedy Ann.
I told you the grunting story would never go away
I often found myself switching between The Real Housewives’ series and The Australian Open. I don’t have ADD but I do get bored easily. This special nugget from The Real Housewives of Atlanta made me think: if grunting were a language, is this how Azarenka and Sharapova would speak to one another off-court?
I told you Steffi Graf didn’t retire
Does Christina McHale have a Poltergeist connection? Does it bode well for the future (present) of American women’s tennis?
Petra Kvitova Is Sleeping With The Enemy
I don’t need to write anything. Decide for yourself. Right around the 35 second mark.
And here is Petra:
Posted in Australian Open
Tagged julia roberts, Maria Sharapova, Petra Kvitova, sleeping with the enemy
6 Comments
Tsonga Cuts Footloose
In an unusual act of cross-the-aisle solidarity, Jo-Wilfried Tsonga has decided to retire his trademark post-match spinning, hopping, gesticulating victory dance. Tsonga told reporters after his first round, four-set win over Denis Istomin in Melbourne, that upon hearing of Andrea Petkovic’s retirement of her “Petko Dance” celebration due to opponent disdain, he feels he needs to do likewise. The Australian Open will mark the last tournament in which Tsonga does his thing.
“I always liked Petko’s dance,” said the No. 6 seed. “The girl has some decent moves. And don’t get me started on those abs. But if she was pissing people off, maybe I’m doing the same. I mean, it is a pretty contrived dance. I shake hands with everybody, put my racquet down, then freak out? It’s not exactly tops in the spontaneity department.”
Fans usually applaud wildly to Tsonga’s antics, and there have never been any obvious signs of opponent disapproval. When Istomin was asked after the match whether Tsonga’s victory celebration bothered him, the always thoughtful Uzbekistan resident replied, “Seriously?”
Still, Tsonga claims that even without the Petkovic controversy, it was time to move on.
“The dance kind of took on a life of it’s on,” said Tsonga. “A few years ago I was at a strip club with Gasquet and he was fond of using a saying: ‘Who has two thumbs and likes…’ Well, you can imagine. I’ve got two thumbs and I like to win tennis matches. It kind of became my thing.”
So what’s next for Tsonga after his final twirl across a tennis court? How will he both celebrate and entertain after closing out a hard fought match?
“I need to work on my bro hug,” he said. “I feel it could be warmer; more heartfelt. That’s what fans really respond to. That’s showmanship. Enthusiasm is so team sport.”
Austrlian Open Women’s Draw Breakdown – Golden Globe Edition
Since the Golden Globes and opening day of the Australian Open are both happening tonight, why not compare the women’s draw to some of the best movie nominations for the Golden Globes? By now you’ve read or thought about almost every angle of the draw so let’s lighten it up a bit. As an added bonus, I’m going to add a little free association that has absolutely nothing to do with movies at the end of each quarter writeup. Those free association questions will be: How do you summarize the quarter? What name jumps out? Who will win? And who will disappoint?
First Quarter: 50/50
Yes, there was a movie called 50/50 (I forgot about it). It is nominated for Best Motion Picture – Comedy or Musical. Interesting to think there could be a movie about cancer in a comedy/musical category.
Anyhow, 50/50 is how I see the top quarter. There are a couple of slam winners in this section (Kim Clijsters and Na Li), some young players with potential (Christina McHale and Laura Robson), a few “is the glass half full?” players like Jelena Jankovic; and Caroline Wozniacki, the number one player with less than 50/50 odds of holding the number one ranking at the end of the tournament.
Free Association: Potential let down. Laura Robson. Na Li. Ashleigh Barty.
Quarter Two: Bridesmaids
This one’s a no brainer. Francesca Schiavone would be the Maya Rudolph character (only because she’s the only slam winner). The rest of them have all been part of the supporting cast, though it seems Victoria Azarenka might be ready to catch the bouquet. I love the visual of Agnieszka Radwanska sitting on the bathroom sink, if only because she always seems to take a big dump at the slams.
Free Association: Throw back tennis. Mona Barthel. Victoria Azarenka. Julia Goerges.
Quarter Three: The Descendants
This quarter is the status quo. A lot of Russians, a serious amount of power, Serena Williams and a boatload of players who bash the ball: Kaia Kanepi, Sabine Lisicki, even little Dominika Cibulkova. If you’re looking for a powerful, modern game, this is your quarter. Plus, I can kind of picture Maria Sharapova dating George Cloony. Honorable mention: Serena Williams, the Meryl Streep of women’s tennis. And with Serena’s ability to forget the past, it’s a little Margaret Thatcher-esque (bad joke).
Free association: Yikes! Lucie Hradecka. Serena Williams. Kaia Kanepi.
Quarter Four: The Help
Let’s face it: this is the quarter of quarters for the WTA. Rising star Petra Kvitova, glamor girls Ana Ivanovic and Maria Kirilenko, local favorite Samantha Stosur (kind of Jelena Dokic…oh, and Jarmila Gajdosova) and a bunch of old players who don’t get any recognition.
Free association: Second slam titles are tough. Marion Bartoli. Petra Kvitova. Samantha Stosur.
Based on my free association I guess that means I’m picking Li, Azarenka, Serena and Kvitova. Which is pretty exciting. For the first time in ages, saying anyone can win the women’s title doesn’t mean anyone can win the women’s title. It means there is some great possibilities and some meaningful depth. I’m hoping 2012 is a big year for women’s tennis but I’m guessing it’s really going to set the stage for an incredible 2013.
Hater!
Don’t Hate the Playa Hate the Game
To her credit, I think Margaret Court understands not hating the playa and hating the game. That’s why she told Martina Navratilova that God loves her, albeit with a caveat: “A wrong doesn’t make a right,” Court explained. And she should know. She’s a Pentecostal minister.
So why is this tall white turkey (thank you Richard Williams) still confused about anger from fans over her bigotry? I don’t think it’s about religion. Instead, I think Fred Stolle nailed it last week when he defended Margaret’s 24 grand slam singles record during Hopman Cup coverage.
Stolle pointed out Margaret doesn’t get the same “all time great” love Martina, Chris and Steffi receive because Court took home 11 Australian Open titles back when they used a draw of 8 (plus a bye) and painted the baseline with vegimite. Margaret, Stolle explained, “beat them all” whenever “all” of them made the trip down under, including Billie Jean King.
He neglected to point out Margaret’s first four Aussie Open titles came at the expense of Jan Lehane O’Neill who won a whopping total of 18 games over those four finals. But it wasn’t Margaret’s fault the draw played out that way; it wasn’t her personal choice to beat poor Jan Lehane O’Neill in the final four years running.
When I listen to Margaret spew her hate speech about homosexuals and how she doesn’t want to discriminate (but wants to discriminate) my mind turns to a familiar slogan her people like to use: WWJD.
But the “J’ in this case is Jack Torrance from The Shining who pretty much said the same thing as Margaret when his wife Wendy was swinging a bat at him. It went something like this: “Wendy? Darling? Light of my life, I’m not gonna hurt ya…I’m just going to bash your brains in. Gonna bash ‘em right the fuck in.”
In other words, go fuck yourself Margaret.
The Serena Shelf or How to Keep Relevant
Speaking of haters, what’s up with Serena not showing the love? No tennis love, no love of sports (way to rub salt in the Dolphins’ wounds, Serena) and the biggest shocker of them all: no more love of meat. That’s right, Serena is going raw – vegan, that is. Let’s face it: The shelf that Ronald McDonald built is in serious danger of collapsing if it is fueled only by seeds and sprouts.
But I suspect something deeper than solidarity with sister Venus who turned to a vegan diet after discovering she has Sjogren’s Syndrome. Serena is looking in good shape these days so she doesn’t need a weight loss program. Besides, Jennifer Hudson signed up with Weight Watchers and then Janet Jackson went to Nutrisystem. What’s left? There is no way Serena is following Carrie Fisher at Jenny Craig. Serena probably has her eye on being a vegan spokesperson. Maybe Serena and Bill Clinton can partner up.
2012 Crystal Ball
Novak Djokovic will keep his game, but change his hair. History tells us when players reach No. 1 they become more fashion conscious. Federer dropped the ponytail and beaded necklace; Nadal covered his biceps and exposed his knees. All image upgrades. Djokovic doesn’t have much to work with in terms of his lid – his hair looks like it’s packed down rather than cut – but he has reached the point of reinventing his current Q-Tip look. The thinking here is Novak dabbles with either a fauxhawk, a pompadour, or keeps his current do and adds a little frosting.
Serena Williams gets her own reality show. Twisted ankles, blood clots, vengeful umpires – tennis has become a chore for Serena, and she’s not pleased about it. She basically confessed to her love-hate relationship with the sport in a recent post-match presser. Problem is Serena’s got lots of bills to pay – hers and her people’s – and tennis is the meal ticket. Slinging trinkets and handbags on HSN won’t cut it, dating Brett Ratner didn’t lead to Rush Hour 8, and Nike isn’t endorsing her to work on her tan. So what’s left? Following the path of her (surprisingly) not-so-dumb Kardashian friend, who got a TV network to pay her $12 million for coverage of her contrived, sham wedding to a little-known, rube NBA rebounder. Not bad work if you can find it. Oh Common, what are you up to the next six months?
Andrea Petkovic gets a boyfriend and tanks in the rankings. The chatty and likeable Petkovic is constantly tweeting about her moribund love-life. She loses a match, thanks her fans for the support, and then announces she’s on the prowl. Come and get some of this Petko! or some such gibberish. Sometimes it’s cute; other times it sounds too much like a desperate divorcee. Finding Mr. Right (or Mr. Right Now) shouldn’t be a tough problem to solve – Petkovic is striking and supremely fit. So fit it looks like she could crack a coconut between her shoulder blades. The smart money is she finds another professional athlete who doesn’t mind her muscles and all the extracurricular happiness sends her game into the toilet.
Andy Roddick becomes a talking head.
It’s poor form to suggest an athlete should retire. If you could play in the toy department, you’d never want to leave, either. That said, 2011 kind of sucked for Roddick. His best showing at a Slam was a (helpless) quarterfinal shellacking at the U.S. Open courtesy of Nadal. Some players hang around into their 30’s collecting paychecks and hoping for that final glorious victory lap. Roddick doesn’t give that vibe. This month he, and somebody named, Bobby Bones, are starting a syndicated sports and pop culture radio show on Saturdays from noon to 3pm on Fox Sports Radio. Roddick gives opinionated and (often) salty interviews and should be comfortable with a microphone in his face. If 2012 looks anything like 2011, expect Roddick to take his game to another forum.
Martina Navratilova challenges Margaret Court to a steel-cage death match. The much anticipated Mayweather-Pacquiao of the tennis world. If Court wins, Martina renounces her homosexuality and starts dating Ashton Kutcher. If Martina wins, Court is forced to guest-star as Jane Lynch’s ex-lover on an episode of Glee before skulking back into her cave and waiting for the Rapture.
Jimmy Connors’s memoir, released this summer, will have the following revelations:
- He tagged multiple Evert women.
- Pancho Segura had sticky fingers.
- Celebrated each of his Slam titles by having a steak sandwich and a can of Schlitz.
- Loves to say he’s going to “Flushing Meadows” anytime he hits the bathroom.
- His mother was little too much like Gillian Darmody from Boardwalk Empire.
During its Grand Slam coverage ESPN will start, and overuse, an incredibly irritating debate segment between the McEnroes. They’re brothers?!?! Really?!?! That’s fantastic. What are the odds? Let’s put them on broadcasts together so they can make the matches they cover totally irrelevant by regaling us with wonderfully inane inside jokes about their dad and Eliot Spitzer. Better yet, let’s put them across the table from each other and have them argue over which of John’s accomplishments are most impressive, and which ones would be broken by Tim Tebow.
Roger Federer continues to age gracefully, but misses out on winning another Grand Slam because of an overturned match point. For all his success, Federer has suffered an unusual amount of heartbreak. Probably more so than any other great player. Last year he squandered two-set leads at Wimbledon and the U.S. Open; the latter providing the further indignity of losing after having match points…against Djokovic…who Federer can’t stand. This year the only way to top that would be to get to match point at a Slam final, say a 5th-set tiebreaker at the U.S. Open, seemingly win it, but have the point challenged by his opponent (has to be Djokovic) and overturned. A few points later Federer will be questioning why he’s not doing the winner’s press conference, and whether there’s sense in the universe.
Posted in Bogus News
Tagged Andrea Petkovic, Andy Roddick, Bobby Bones, Brett Ratner, Connors autobiography, Jimmy Connors, John McEnroe, Kim Kardashian, Kris Humphries, Margaret Court, martina navratilova, novak djokovic, Patrick McEnroe, Rafael Nadal, Roger Federer, serena williams
Leave a comment
The Huggy Bear
For more than 20 years, Teddy Forstmann, the Wall Street icon who died this past weekend, hosted one of the most coveted, charitable and secretive pro-am doubles tournaments in tennis. Five years ago, during one of the event’s final gatherings, we got an insider’s look.
It was two days before the start of the 2006 U.S. Open and tour veterans Mark Philippoussis and Andrei Pavel were getting in some last-minute preparation. Each had a highly anticipated first round match—Philippoussis was to meet No. 2 seed Rafael Nadal and Pavel would take on Andre Agassi, who was playing in the final tournament of his career. The two were on opposite sides of a court warming up for some doubles. Alongside Philippoussis was his partner, Doug Teitelbaum; Pavel was teamed with Kristian Cee. Not familiar with Teitelbaum or Cee? That’s not surprising, since neither is a regular on the pro circuit. In fact, neither possesses a stroke any serious player would envy. The match wasn’t being played at Flushing Meadows, but a hundred miles away on the backyard court of a mansion located among the most exclusive real estate in the northeast. Instead of autograph-seeking fans holding Sharpies and oversized balls, well-heeled spectators with BlackBerrys stapled to their hands surrounded the court. Why would Philippoussis and Pavel fritter away their last few days before the Open messing around with hackers in a secluded hideaway?
Welcome to the Huggy Bears Invitational. For more than 20 years the Huggy Bear (as it’s commonly known) has been one of the world’s most coveted pro-am doubles events. Players like Ken Rosewall, John McEnroe, and Martina Navratilova have participated in the five-day, 32-team charity tournament that takes place in the Hamptons on Long Island. If you’ve never heard of the Huggy Bear, you’re not alone. For almost all
of its existence, the first rule about playing in the Huggy Bear was: Never talk about the Huggy Bear. Press and outsiders weren’t permitted to get a whiff of this ultimate insiders’
event.That is, until now.
In the 1980s there was no bigger player on Wall Street than Ted Forstmann. His private equity firm, Forstmann Little, made billions in leveraged buyouts of companies such as Gulfstream Aerospace and Dr. Pepper, and turned Forstmann into an industry legend. Around that time—1985 to be exact—his older brother, Tony, started a tennis tournament
with friends and local pros on the court at his Hamptons residence. No slouch in the financial world himself, Tony’s place was more of a compound than a home. They christened his sprawling backyard Camp Huggy Bears, supposedly in reference to Tony’s nickname among his family, because he is, by all accounts, a hugger. Although the name of the tournament is shrouded in mystery, people with knowledge of the event’s history say it most likely derives from that moniker. Please pardon the lack of certainty: While lips have loosened around the Huggy Bear, they’re not exactly flapping.
A few years later, Ted and his younger brother, Nick, who owned homes in Southampton, got involved in the tournament and decided to turn it into an event to raise money for children’s charities all over the world. They divided the draw into two sections—a pro-am and a pro–ex-pro—with the winners from each division squaring off in the final for a handsome winners’ check. The brothers’ collective clout and deep pockets attracted many
of the sport’s biggest names. They asked celebrities and their wealthy friends to put up hefty sums to participate and limited the spectators to an invitation-only list of charitable contributors. Matches were played at Camp Huggy Bears, Ted’s place, and other private courts in the area. The pros stayed in the spacious homes of the patrons. “You make great connections with highly successful people,” says Tom Gullikson, a five-time Huggy Bear participant. “You meet rich, powerful guys who can help you down the road.”
Teitelbaum has been one of those hosts and, although he had never played in a tennis tournament, he wanted in on the action. “About four years ago I asked Teddy if I
could play,” Teitelbaum says. “At the time I weighed around 360 pounds and he said I could if I dropped 100 pounds.” Teitelbaum shed the weight through diet, exercise, and the last recourse of the wealthy: gastric-bypass surgery. “I’ve dropped 120 pounds so far,” he says, which earned him his entry into the event.
Since amateurs like Teitelbaum are skilled club players at best, you might think the touring pros would have mercy on them. “Never,” says Mike Bryan, one half of the world’s
best men’s doubles team and a two-time Huggy Bear player. “There’s some big money involved and the way the format is set up, you’ve got to go all out at all times. We’re crushing the ball just like we’re playing a tour match.”
The format that Bryan refers to is the event’s bisque system. Not to be confused with a thick soup, a Huggy Bear bisque is a free point that can be taken at any time during a match. Each team is given a different bisque handicap designated by Ted Forstmann and the tournament director, Tom Annear. The team of Philippoussis and Teitelbaum, for example, received a rating of 7+1, which means they got seven bisques for the first two sets plus an additional one if the match went three sets. When two teams meet, their handicaps are weighed against each other, and the team with more bisques retains the difference.
“The first time I played with the bisques, it blew my mind,” Jimmy Arias says. “You get the feeling that if you’re serving at 30-all you have to win the point or your opponents will use a bisque and it’s a break.” Arias teamed with Jeff Tarango in 2005 and made it to the final of the pro–ex-pro division. “Using the bisques takes some skill,” Tarango says. He tells the story of starting a tiebreaker with one bisque remaining. The logical thing seemed to be to hold onto it until his team could cash it in late in the breaker. But sitting courtside,
Forstmann advised Tarango to take the bisque on the first point to negate the serve of the opposing pro. Tarango then served twice, winning both points, and he and his partner followedcit up by winning the two service points of the opposingcamateur. Just like that they were up 5-0 and went on to win thectiebreaker easily. Forstmann, an avid card player in his youth,cknows how to play the angles.
Wondering why Tarango was taking tactical advice from Forstmann? That’s another facet of the Huggy Bear—the now-defunct, high-stakes Calcutta auction. On the Tuesday
night before the tournament, backers of the event and even players got a chance to buy one of the participating teams. Fred Stolle, the Aussie great and a fixture at the Huggy Bear, was usually master of ceremonies. Money was put in a large pot as prices for teams reached the tens of thousands. A sizeable portion was donated to the charities, but the rest went into the bettors’ pool. Depending on how the team you bought fared, buyers could net a handsome profit. Forstmann had bought Tarango’s team that year and he wanted to see a return on his investment.
“A lot of the guys involved with the event like to bet, and it was pretty exciting when they did the Calcutta,” says Stolle, a four-time winner of the Huggy Bear, including two titles with his son, Sandon. Many players were already getting substantial appearance fees, and the tournament has significant prize money (last year’s total purse was $351,000), but the Calcutta upped the interest level.
“The owners of my team would get a little vocal,” Gullikson says. “They’d say things like, ‘Hey, I own you. Let’s go. Don’t miss that return of serve.’ But it was all in good fun.”
In a tournament full of Type-A achievers, no one wants to win more than Forstmann, who declined to be interviewed for this article. “Teddy is without a doubt the most competitive
human being on the planet,” says Bob Bryan, his playing partner of the past two years. The two won the title in 2005, a first for anyone in the Forstmann family.
Even at 67, and stocky ringer for crooner Tony Bennett, Forstmann is a capable athlete, having played goalie for Yale’s ice hockey team. “He knows what to do,” Stolle says. “He doesn’t make many errors and lets the big fella [Bryan] do the work.” He also gives himself plenty of bisques (6+1 in 2006) and plays with an intensity that matches his business persona. Players tell of a time when Forstmann called Aussie legend Rosewall a “cheater” (which he preceded with an expletive) because he didn’t agree with a line call of Rosewall’s. Spectators’ jaws hit the ground, and Rosewall, a noted sportsman, was steamed, but the Hall-of-Famer managed to forgive the insult.
The cutthroat nature that Forstmann helped instill was eased several years ago when the Calcutta was retired. Some Huggy Bear regulars point to the appearance of former Louisiana Sen. John Breaux in the draw as the reason for the change. Breaux was still in office when he first played the event, and it’s believed organizers didn’t want to have any appearance of impropriety.
“I think it’s different without the Calcutta,” Tarango says. “There’s not as much energy in the crowd and people are not as into it.” Indeed, the spectators are a relaxed group these days, clad in summery pinks, oranges, and yellows and engaged in courtside chatter that has little to do with tennis. Still, the fans are savvy enough to appreciate the opportunity
to watch great tennis in an intimate setting. So when former pro Richey Reneberg blisters a return by opponent Jiri Novak, onlookers rewarded the shot with a healthy round of applause. The Huggy Bear is still something to see.
Saturday night at the Huggy Bear is party time. A tent is erected on the grounds of Southampton Hospital to accommodate the hundreds of people who attend the annual benefit dinner. Faith Hill, the Dixie Chicks, Stevie Nicks, and Roger Waters are just some of the performers who have entertained over the years. Don Henley made his third appearance last year. To get a table requires a donation in the tens of thousands. Celebrities, tennis and otherwise, make appearances. In 2006, pop star Gwen Stefani
was there with her husband, and first-time Huggy Bear participant, Gavin Rossdale.
Since its inception, the Huggy Bear has raised close to $30 million for countless charities that help children in need. In 1997, one of those organizations was the Silver Lining Foundation, which was founded by former pro Andrea Jaeger to help children with cancer. Jaeger had heard about the Huggy Bear and set up a meeting with Forstmann. He agreed to donate $1.7 million to the cause. Now called the Little Star Foundation, it has expanded to include kids with other diseases.
“Teddy’s so involved,” Jaeger says, “but he gets his friends involved as well. He has such a passion for helping children that when you hear him speak, you don’t just admire him, you
want to get on board.”
One charity that received funds from the Huggy Bear in 2006 was Friends of Nick, which was started in memory of Nick Forstmann, who died of lung cancer in 2001. The organization aims to build character in eighth-graders and awards scholarships for them to attend inner-city archdiocesan high schools. Nicky, as friends called him, was the heart and soul of the Huggy Bear. His death rocked Ted, who didn’t want to continue the event without his younger brother. He declared that the 2001 Huggy Bear would be the last. But then he surprised everyone and decided to carry on until 2004, the event’s 20th anniversary. Shirts made for the tournament that year had “Last One” printed on them.
Ending the event was not a popular decision. Tarango purchased Post-it notes at a local drug store, wrote “Not” on each one, and stuck them in front of “Last One” on the shirts.
Forstmann felt the groundswell and agreed to host one more time. That was 2005, the year he first teamed with Bob Bryan. When the two won the title, Forstmann felt they had to defend it. At the dinner the following year, Forstmann revealed that he’s prepared to host until the Huggy Bear reaches its 25th anniversary in 2009. All those in attendance greeted the announcement with rousing applause.
Then they immediately saved the date on their BlackBerrys.
Earning Curve
How much did you make last year?
Labor strife and sports – nobody likes it. To fans, the employees look greedy and the employers often more so. There are rumblings in men’s tennis that the inmates may riot. There’s talk, however quiet and brief, about forming a new player’s union. It’s not as big a story in the U.S. where the sport is more of an afterthought; most likely a byproduct of an eight-year Grand Slam drought. Oddly enough a line could be drawn connecting the two situations. Why are the game’s best considering unionizing? Why is the U.S. struggling to produce top male players? As Deep Throat said to Woodward: follow the money.
Back in 1985 Ivan Lendl finished the season No. 1, and led the ATP Tour with $1.9 million in earnings. Compared to the major team sports at the time, Lendl would have been the second-highest baseball player (Mike Schmidt: $2.1 million) and the fourth-highest basketball player (Magic: $2.5 million, Moses Malone: $2.1 million, and Kareem: $2 million). Inconceivable as it seems today, Lendl actually out-earned the highest-paid NFLer, Super Bowl MVP and Saturday Night Live masturbator, Joe Montana ($1.3 million). Lendl more than doubled the salary of the Great One ($825K), the NHL’s highest-paid skater, who had a much less memorable SNL appearance.
This was an era when Americans like Jimmy Connors and John McEnroe – who constantly bemoan the demise of U.S. tennis – were on a fairly even economic playing field with their sports brethren. In 1984, McEnroe’s pinnacle as a pro (and in theatrics), he topped $2 million in earnings. Throw in the advantages individual sports stars have in the endorsement world, and the grass (and money) is plenty green on this side of the fence. To the great generation of Sampras, Agassi, Courier, and Chang – top juniors at the time – tennis was magazine covers and shaving commercials.
Fast-forward to 2010 when Rafael Nadal became the game’s first $10 million man after a stellar season which saw him win three Slams and seven total tournaments. While an impressive haul, it wouldn’t put Nadal in the top 25 highest-earners in either baseball, basketball, or football. Players in those sports are trafficking in the $20-$30+ million range. His countryman and commercial wingman, Pau Gasol, made over $15 million playing second fiddle to Kobe Bryant (in salary as well) on the Lakers. In fact, the $10 million mark was first past in the MLB 13 years prior by the ever-pleasant Albert Belle. Perhaps more telling is the fact that Lendl’s 1985 earnings would still place him 10th on the 2010 ATP prize-money list. The top-earners in the team sports from 1985 wouldn’t even be making their league’s current average salaries. Montana still has to shill for Sketcher’s. Nadal’s winnings would put him at the top of the NHL’s money food chain, but hockey institutes a cap on how much players can earn. An individual player can only make a certain percentage of the team’s overall payroll. But this also distributes the wealth more evenly throughout the league. The average NHL salary in 2010 was $2.4 million, which would have been 8th on the ATP money-list. Plus, the minimum player salary is $500K, which only 61 players on the ATP made in 2010; there are around 700 NHL players. Throw in players are paid guaranteed contracts regardless of performance, all travel and training expenses are covered, and there’s a legitimate off-season in team sports and the disparity grows deeper.
Perhaps a more fitting comparison for tennis would be to pro golf. The two sports are seen as country club siblings and both adhere to the independent contractor model. There are no guaranteed contracts in either sport; players only eat what they kill, albeit in cooperative silence. In 1985 Curtis Strange led the PGA Tour with $542K in earnings, making him a veritable pauper compared to Lendl.
Since then a little something called Tiger Woods happened to golf. His massive appeal and penchant for chain-restaurant waitresses brought tremendous added revenue from title sponsors and television contracts. Woods has crossed the $10 million threshold in yearly prize-money several times. These past few years he has been busy repairing his knee, finding his swing, and nursing his ego, leaving the PGA Tour without a dominant golfer in 2010. Matt Kuchar topped in prize money at $4.9 million, a mere $100K ahead of Jim Furyk and his crazy swing. Furyk played well enough, though, to win some convoluted points race called the FedEx Cup which tracks player performance at certain events throughout the year. His bonus? $10 million. So while this doesn’t count toward the official prize money list, Furyk actually made closer to $15 million – without winning a major. When Woods won his two FedEx Cups – it just completed its fifth year – his yearly earnings were just south of $21 million. As Mardy Fish recently tweeted: “10 Million to the winner of the Fed Ex Cup on the PGA Tour. Thats kind of a game changing sum of money.” In his entire 11-year career, Fish has made – singles and doubles combined – just over $6 million.
But it’s not just more at the top; golf does a better job of spreading its wealth. While 20 ATP players made $1+ million in 2010, 95 PGA golfers made seven figures. And just so you don’t think the money in tennis doesn’t trickle down because the top guys gobble all the prizes, in 2007 Tiger made slightly less than $11 million, yet 99 guys still made at least $1 million.
So in terms of economic growth, the numbers don’t paint a flattering picture. Not being attractive enough for a major television contract is a definite factor, but players unionizing could go a long way in determining how current revenues are distributed. During this past U.S. Open it was revealed that players received just 13% of tournament revenues. In their recent collective bargaining agreement settled earlier this year, the NFL’s players union agreed with franchise owners to a nearly 50% stake of all revenues. The $18 lobster salad sandwich sold at the Open is mighty tasty, but fans are flocking to Flushing to see the players. Perhaps they do deserve a larger reward.
Given that tennis is perhaps the most expensive sport to undertake seriously at the junior levels, and one of the least lucrative at the professional ranks, pursuing it as a career becomes a pretty poor investment. A 12 year-old with a passion for the game might not be thinking of the carrot down the road, but his parents most certainly are. And any coach will tell you: No player reaches the top without a pushy parent or benefactor in the wings. Besides, kids are pretty precocious these days. They recognize sports are big business and love of the game is often trumped by love of the dollar.
Several years ago, towards the end of his playing days, Andre Agassi spoke at tennis event in Las Vegas. At one point he thanked the audience for supporting his career and, in deprecating Agassi fashion, he also thanked Michael Jordan for having never picked up a racquet. Otherwise, Agassi would have been Horace Grant to Pete Sampras’ Scottie Pippen. Agassi went on to wonder what American tennis might look like if the sport ever figures a way to pilfer some of the best athletes from the professional team sports.
It was a longshot bet then, and the odds have only gotten worse.
72unforcederrors 
