| Feedback:
THURSDAY, FebRUARY 24
Cronin replies to stories on Young's size, Carlsen's backhand, WTA
guarantees, the Acura-US Open Series deal
Young is big enough to
play well
I read your article about Donald Young playing Robby Ginepri
in San Jose and how Young is still too small at 5' 10'' 150 lbs.
to "knock out giants like Marat Safin." I always enjoy
your coverage of tennis but I do have a few questions and want
to raise some points that you may or may not want to consider
when writing a future article about Young (and his size).
Here they are:
Did you see the Australian Open, where Safin was nearly knocked
out in the 4th round by 5' 4'' Olivier Rochus? Would Rochus have
won that match if he were a few inches taller?
Do you remember Lleyton Hewitt at age 16 taking his first title
in the Adelaide tourney over Andre Agassi in 1998? Hewitt was
5' 9'' 140 lbs. then. Isn't that what Young is now? Why does he
need to get any bigger? If he's got the game, would it really
matter how big the player is?
Wasn't Marcelo Rios a 5' 8'' lefty with a crafty game? Did he
need to get bigger, as well? Would he have won a Slam if he were
bigger? Or would he have won a Slam if mentally he weren't as
unstable as Elena Dementieva second serve?
My point is: If you have the game, does height/size really matter?
Withflow@aol.com
TR.net: Terrific
points all, but size does matter for Young now. He's listed at 5-foot-10,
150, but looks more like a thin 5-foot-8, 135. He has a terrific
stroke base and hand speed. He turns into the ball quite rapidly,
using his hips and trunk and, consequently, is able to generate
a fair amount of power. Moreover, he will keep growing and by the
time he's 18, he should be 6-feet tall and weigh around 175.
However, your point is that since players such as Rios, Hewitt and
Rochus have been successful, size really doesn't matter. But it
does when you are talking about developing big weapons, because
taller and stronger players tend to hit the ball harder. That doesn't
mean that a smaller player can't make up for it with speed, guile
and variety, like the aforementioned three. But if you look at their
careers, only one, Hewitt, has won Grand Slams. Rios should have
and his failure to do so had nothing to do with his height (it was
his bad head and back), and Rochus never will. As great as Hewitt
is in many categories, even he has trouble matching up against the
big boys forehand-to-forehand and his lack of a big first serve
forced him to play numerous long points. So yes, height and strength
do matter, but extraordinary players can overcome those obstacles.
Whether Young looks like he could be an elite player, but unless
he does through a major growth spurt will become one is still an
open question.
Our educated guess is that the women
who are receiving cash or products in Dubai did receive approval
beforehand. Don' be surprised if these rules gets amended in the
near future. And by the way, in the case of Agassi, who received
a massive guarantee there this week, word has it that he took money
for his charity.
Carlsen's
backhand
I don't know if you happened to
watch the Memphis men's final, but Kenneth Carlsen was playing
lights out on his backhand and hitting unbelievable passing shots
that left Max Mirnyi dumbfounded. Perhaps his backhand has been
a weakness in the past, but it sure wasn't on Sunday. I had been
trying to figure out how Carlsen beat Magnus Norman in the '02
Tokyo final, now I see why. His play on Sunday was inspired and
I've decided that he is extremely talented but unfortunately inconsistent
in his results. Aaron Gerritz
TR.net:
Carlsen may have zoned on his backhand against Mirnyi, but that's
the place to go if you are going to beat the lefty serve-and-volleyer.
Andre Agassi tortured that side in San Jose. The Dane is often
late to the ball there.
The Acura-US Open deal
Last summer, you wrote extensively about
the Acura Classic in Carlsbad turning down a spot in the U.S.
Open Series. The USTA and Promotion Sports just announced that
the Acura will join the US Open Series; why do you think it happened?
More money? Better TV package?
Mike Thompson
San Diego
TR.net:
Last year, Promotion Sports co-owner Raquel
Giscafre (who owns the tournament with Jane Stratton) didn't find
enough reasons for joining the Series when they already had a
good TV deal in place with ESPN. They already had attracted all
the top players – they are a Tier I tournament at a beautiful
resort in a gorgeous city run by ex-players, a perfect recipe
for success – and they had a deal with Acura that precluded
them from putting up other on-court signs.
This year, sources say they struck a deal with Acura that allows
the US Open Series to have on-court signage. They signed a TV
deal with the USTA where they don't have to sell the spots on
ESPN and The Tennis Channel (which broadcasts the early days and
the dubs). Plus, they will get money from it; they will have the
benefit of having their tournament publicized at no cost to themselves
by the USTA; and they can essentially offer the players more prize
money through the US Open bonus pool (all 11 US Open Series have
that benefit), which makes them even more attractive. They will
be advertised as the United States only women's Tier I summer
tournament (the Canadian Open is also a Tier I and follows the
Acura.)
It looks like a good deal for both the USTA (props to pro tennis
Chief Arlen Kantarian for cementing the series a year before most
folks believed he could pull it off) and Promotion Sports. Other
than the rich players getting richer, it's hard to find any fault
with the US Open Series concept as a whole, as fans can watch
tennis every weekend on a major channel.
|
