adplus-dvertising
Connect with us

Sports

Mailbag: Is Roger Federer's ATP-WTA Merger Proposal Realistic? – Sports Illustrated

Published

 on


The idea to combine the men’s and women’s tennis tours is making waves throughout the sport, but it’s not a new concept and the obstacles have been insurmountable for decades.

Hey all you cool cats and kittens…

Housekeeping:

300x250x1

1) We had no Beyond the Baseline podcast last week but the wonderful Jamie Lisanti and I spoke about the Williams/Williams final at the 1999 Miami event for The Record, a new podcast from SI.

2) This week’s Beyond the Baseline podcast guest, Dr. Jonathan Katz, talks sports psychology and the challenges athletes face during times of inactivity.

3) Spoiler alert: Dr. Katz—who’s worked with winners of majors, lower-ranked players and the University of Texas tennis program—is offering to volunteer his services to professional players during this time of inactivity.

***

I filed the Mailbag last week and then, boom, Roger Federer drops a tweet and tennis goes a-twitter. What if the ATP and WTA joined forces? Here’s Andy Roddick, Lindsay and I discussing on Tennis Channel.

Personally, my optimism here is of the guarded variety. The tours ought to combine for a host of reasons. The bargaining power is greater when men and women offer a unified product. The tours’ business models are essentially the same. It’s better for fans, the overwhelming majority of whom follow both tours. It’s better for streamlining everything from data to officiating. One of tennis’ great virtues: men and women play alongside each other at the biggest events. Why not capitalize on this?

I also think a joint tour is a great hedge. At some point the Big Three are not going to be on the scene. When Coco Gauff or Naomi Osaka—both from commercially critically markers—are killing it…well, wouldn’t it benefit from a diversified portfolio?

[Inflection point here]

The concern to me is the execution. I’ve heard this again and again: the WTA is in some real trouble if the Asian swing doesn’t materialize this fall. Just look at public filing and it’s clear the ATP is more economically robust. “Mergers” are rare in business. Others go further: “There are no mergers; there are only acquisitions.” For what it’s worth, here is the ATP’s most recent public filing. Here is the WTA’s.

When Federer tweeted his remarks last week—followed, surely strategically—by Nadal and Wawrinka, among others, it drew a quick and positive response from the salon, including WTA players. Darren Cahill—who, of course, coaches a top female player—was very pointed (and overall spot-on) in his remarks with the excellent Reem Abulleil.

As is always the case, the devil resides in the details. Are the men willing to divide prize money equally? Or are the women willing to accept less than 50/50? Is there a creative solution? Will competing sponsors be accommodated? Are both tours willing to surrender power to a commissioner? You’d like to think that these are deal points that can be negotiated after an agreement in principle. But then again, the idea of merging tours is not a new one. These hold-ups have been insurmountable for decades.

Mailbag

Have a question or comment for Jon? Email him at jon_wertheim@yahoo.com or tweet him @jon_wertheim.

Your recent Mailbag mentions the financial troubles of mid-ranked players; it got me thinking. I’m reading about the original 9 for the WTA, and also getting gofundme requests for Vic Seixas’ last days care. Is there a legacy fund the tours have to provide revenue or comfort for some of these legends? Do top players sometimes independently kick money over to those who inspired them? Thanks for keeping our spirits high.
Jon B, Seattle, Wa.

• Here’s the gofundme set up last year.

Tennis—and this is a real virtue—does well to take care of its own. But it’s often on an informal basis. I have heard of top players donating funds. (We should also point out that one of the inspirations for the Laver Cup was Roger Federer realizing that he made more in one night, playing an exo in China, than Laver made for his career.) Some of the fault here lies with Open tennis and the greedy federations. Some of this is simply that players in Seixas’ generation predated the media rights and the big money days in sports. (I was just reading about Pete Rose holding out for $107,500 the year after he won a batting title.)

Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. As a child clinical psychology intern in 1968 at a major city hospital, I tested and interviewed a boy and his mum. He was ready for kindergarten age-wise, but had some developmental delay, and severe hearing and vision problems, which were all the result of mum contracting German measles early in her pregnancy. Getting childhood diseases because you are not vaccinated is not always benign by a long shot and it endangers populations of at-risk people like mothers-to-be, cancer patients, etc. Antivaxxers need NOT put such a mum through this and damage her unborn son when it can be avoided. It is tantamount to assault.
Jean

• It is disappointing Djokovic gave this credence. It is possible to be “a seeker”—which is admirable—and open to alternative therapy/psychology/methods while also respecting objective reality. The idea that—during a global pandemic, as his sport contemplates a path to relaunching—a top player would make a comment like that…it’s really problematic. Again, I don’t want to impugn Djokovic. He is, overall, a force of good. He is a worthy No. 1. His willingness to challenge conventional wisdom is something to be admired. But he is way off base here and should run back, not walk back, those regrettable remarks.

If Fed wins the gold in Tokyo next year, where would that rank for his accomplishments?
@pmalan1979

• We usually defer and demure on the hypotheticals, but this is too good to pass up. And the answer: way up there. Like, his greatest achievement after winning a major. We’re talking about winning the elusive gold in singles…at age 40…in a field featuring his two rivals. Sentimentally: he began dating his wife at the 2000 Sydney Olympics so there’s that as well. Objectively, that is an immense accomplishment.

But I also think we need to take our cue from the athletes themselves. It’s not quite Serena gunning for 24 majors, but Federer has been outspoken in his prioritizing the Olympics. There’s no question he constructed his 2000 schedule so he would peak in the summer at Wimbledon, Tokyo and New York. When players emphasize goals, almost by definition, they become freighted with extra significance.

I hope you’re well and staying safe. Writing to you from quarantine in Toronto….I just read (on TMZ of all places) that Novak is an anti-vaxxer. 3…2…1… Go! Be well.
L.T.

• I am not doing this to pick on Djokovic. I just want to convey how many people—from all over the globe, including Serbia—were disappointed by this.

Are the public courts in Wichita actually open for Derek’s boys to play…? The Wichita city web site seems to indicate not; all the courts near me are closed and chained up. I’m jealous, I guess! Stay safe—keep up the good work.
Joe Cook, Arlington, Mass.

• Speaking of jealous, know what’s an underrated song? And are in agreement? Black Crowes d. Counting Crows?

Where were we? Oh, right. Tennis courts. Here’s the latest from the USTA:

The USTA recognizes that the coronavirus has been affecting different parts of the country in different ways and with different timing. We therefore believe it will be possible for people to return to playing tennis safely in some cities and states sooner than others. Attached are two “Playing Tennis Safely” documents, one geared to players and one geared to tennis facilities, that have been developed by the USTA in conjunction with its Medical Advisory Group and its Industry partners. These documents provide extensive guidelines for the safe return to the courts. By following these guidelines as well as those of local governments and health agencies, facilities and players will be able to make informed decisions as to when play can recommence. Please note that the local decisions on phased opening will not apply to USTA-sanctioned programs. These programs will remain suspended until at least May 31 as previously announced.

I live in Washington, D.C., and all public tennis courts in the metro area are closed. Is this true in the rest of the country? Why? If any sport naturally embraces physical distancing (aka social distancing), it would be tennis, the ultimate non-contact sport. Not to sound opportunistic, but it’s a great time to promote the sport of tennis. Is a there way that the USTA and other big stakeholders (Tennis Channel, IMG, big tournaments and tournament sponsors) could lobby to have tennis recognized as a “safe” sport and get our courts re-opened?
Jenna S. Ward

• As Dan Patrick put it last week, with a little creativity, golf and tennis could really capitalize on this strange period. Safety, obviously, is paramount. But surely there is an opportunity for a sport—where the athletes stand apart and cordoned by a net—to make inroads.

Ending on a happy note:

Tennis Channel will introduce an international subscription streaming service April 28, the first-stage rollout for what is intended to become a global tennis-media destination. Initially launching in Germany, Austria and Switzerland, with plans for other worldwide markets, the over-the-top (OTT) platform will offer content on the new Tennis Channel International app, with the service available in all three countries on www.tennischannel.com. The product debuts ahead of the Tennis Point Exhibition Series, a four-day tennis competition between men’s tennis professionals May 1-4 – the first professional-level tennis in two months – which will be shown live and on-demand on Tennis Channel International. With the launch, Tennis Channel will make its programming available for purchase outside the United States for the first time.

Let’s block ads! (Why?)

728x90x4

Source link

Continue Reading

Sports

Need to Know: Bruins at Maple Leafs | Game 3 | Boston Bruins – NHL.com

Published

 on


Familiar Territory

James van Riemsdyk has played his fair share of playoff contests here in Toronto – but all of them have come in blue and white. On Wednesday night, he would be on the other side for the first time if he indeed makes his Bruins postseason debut, which appeared to be a strong possibility based on the Black & Gold’s morning skate.

“It’s always special to play in this building,” said van Riemsdyk, who played in 20 postseason games with Toronto, including nine at Scotiabank Arena. “In this rivalry, it’s always a lot of fun. This time of year is always amazing, no matter where you’re at – if you’re at a 500-seat arena or a rink with all the tradition and history like this. It’s always fun and always a great opportunity to get in there.”

van Riemsdyk was a healthy scratch for the first two games of this series, following a trend across the second half of the regular season, during which he sat out several games.

300x250x1

“Playoff time of year is always the best time of year,” said van Riemsdyk, who has 20 goals and 31 points in 71 career playoff games between Philadelphia and Toronto. “Obviously, in this rivalry, it’s always a lot of fun – two fun buildings to play in. You cherish every opportunity you get.

“This time of year, you learn that along the way, it’s all about the team. Whatever the team’s asking you to do, that’s always got to be your mindset and approach…you stay at it every day and just take it one day at a time.”

Montgomery said that if van Riemsdyk does re-enter the lineup, he’ll be looking for the veteran winger to help the Bruins’ offensive game. He also complimented van Riemsdyk’s professionalism throughout a trying second half.

“I guess getting his stick on more pucks,” Montgomery said on what he wants to see from van Riemsdyk. “We’ve talked about it a lot of times internally. Him and [Kevin] Shattenkirk have been great. They’re true pros. Every day come to work, come to get better. It’s not an easy situation, but he’s been great.”

van Riemsdyk concurred with his coach’s sentiments about helping Boston’s offensive attack, saying that he’ll be aiming to be around the net as much as possible.

“I think you’ve got to stay true to who you are as a player and play with good details and manage the game well and play to your strengths as a player,” he said. “This time of year, being around the net is always an important trait. You see all the goals being scored, it’s all within 5-10 feet of the net. That’s an area that I pride myself on, so going to be doing my best to get there and have an impact there.”

Adblock test (Why?)

728x90x4

Source link

Continue Reading

Sports

NHL teams, take note: Alexandar Georgiev is proof that anything can happen in the playoffs

Published

 on

It’s hard to say when, exactly, Alexandar Georgiev truly began to win some hearts and change some minds on Tuesday night.

Maybe it was in the back half of the second period; that was when the Colorado Avalanche, for the first time in their first-round Stanley Cup playoff series against the Winnipeg Jets, actually managed to hold a lead for more than, oh, two minutes or thereabouts. Maybe it was when the Avs walked into the locker room up 4-2 with 20 minutes to play.

Maybe it was midway through the third, when a series of saves by the Avalanche’s beleaguered starting goaltender helped preserve their two-goal buffer. Maybe it was when the buzzer sounded after their 5-2 win. Maybe it didn’t happen until the Avs made it into their locker room at Canada Life Centre, tied 1-1 with the Jets and headed for Denver.

At some point, though, it should’ve happened. If you were watching, you should’ve realized that Colorado — after a 7-6 Game 1 loss that had us all talking not just about all those goals, but at least one of the guys who’d allowed them — had squared things up, thanks in part to … well, that same guy.

300x250x1

Georgiev, indeed, was the story of Game 2, stopping 28 of 30 shots, improving as the game progressed and providing a lesson on how quickly things can change in the playoffs — series to series, game to game, period to period, moment to moment. The narrative doesn’t always hold. Facts don’t always cooperate. Alexandar Georgiev, for one night and counting, was not a problem for the Colorado Avalanche. He was, in direct opposition to the way he played in Game 1, a solution. How could we view him as anything else?

He had a few big-moment saves, and most of them came midway through the third period with his team up 4-2. There he was with 12:44 remaining, stopping a puck that had awkwardly rolled off Nino Niederreiter’s stick; two missed posts by the Avs at the other end had helped spring Niederreiter for a breakaway. Game 1 Georgiev doesn’t make that save.

There he was, stopping Nikolaj Ehlers from the circle a few minutes later. There wasn’t an Avs defender within five feet, and there was nothing awkward about the puck Ehlers fired at his shoulder. Game 1 Georgiev gets scored on twice.

(That one might’ve been poetic justice. It was Ehlers who’d put the first puck of the night on Georgiev — a chip from center ice that he stopped, and that the crowd in Winnipeg greeted with the ol’ mock cheer. Whoops.)

By the end of it all, Georgiev had stared down Connor Hellebuyck and won, saving nearly 0.5 goals more than expected according to Natural Stat Trick, giving the Avalanche precisely what they needed and looking almost nothing like the guy we’d seen a couple days before. Conventional wisdom coming into this series was twofold: That the Avs have firepower, high-end talent and an overall edge — slight as it may be — on Winnipeg, and that Georgiev is shaky enough to nuke the whole thing.

That wasn’t without merit, either. Georgiev’s .897 save percentage in the regular season was six percentage points below the league average, and he hadn’t broken even in expected goals allowed (minus-0.21). He’d been even worse down the stretch, putting up an .856 save percentage in his final eight appearances, and worse still in Game 1, allowing seven goals on 23 shots and more than five goals more than expected. That’s not bad; that’s an oil spill. Writing him off would’ve been understandable. Writing off Jared Bednar for rolling him out there in Game 2 would’ve been understandable. Writing the Avs off — for all of Nathan MacKinnon and Cale Makar’s greatness — would’ve been understandable.

It just wouldn’t have been correct.

The fact that this all went down now, four days into a two-month ordeal, is a gift — because the postseason thus far has been short on surprises, almost as a rule. The Rangers and Oilers are overwhelming the Capitals and Kings. The Hurricanes are halfway done with the Islanders. The Canucks are struggling with the Predators. PanthersLightning is tight, but one team is clearly better than the other. BruinsMaple Leafs is a close matchup featuring psychic baggage that we don’t have time to unpack. In Golden KnightsStars, Mark Stone came back and scored a huge goal.

None of that should shock you. None of that should make you blink.

Georgiev being good enough for Colorado, though? After what we saw in Game 1? Strange, surprising and completely true. For now.

Adblock test (Why?)

728x90x4

Source link

Continue Reading

Sports

"Laugh it off": Evander Kane says Oilers won’t take the bait against Kings | Offside

Published

 on

The LA Kings tried every trick in the book to get the Edmonton Oilers off their game last night.

Hacks after the whistle, punches to the face, and interference with line changes were just some of the things that the Oilers had to endure, and throughout it all, there was not an ounce of retaliation.

All that badgering by the Kings resulted in at least two penalties against them and fuelled a red-hot Oilers power play that made them pay with three goals on four chances. That was by design for Edmonton, who knew that LA was going to try to pester them as much as they could.

That may have worked on past Oilers teams, but not this one.

300x250x1

“We’ve been in a series now for the third year in a row with these guys,” Kane said after practice this morning. “We know them, they know us… it’s one of those things where maybe it makes it a little easier to kind of laugh it off, walk away, or take a shot.

“That type of stuff isn’t gonna affect us.”

Once upon a time, this type of play would get under the Oilers’ skin and result in retaliatory penalties. Yet, with a few hard-knock lessons handed down to them in the past few seasons, it seems like the team is as determined as ever to cut the extracurriculars and focus on getting revenge on the scoreboard.

Ryan Nugent-Hopkins, the longest-tenured player on this Oilers team, had to keep his emotions in check with Kings defender Vladislav Gavrikov, who punched him in the face early in the game. The easy reaction would be to punch back, but the veteran Nugen-Hopkins took his licks and wound up scoring later in the game.

“It’s going to be physical, the emotions are high, and there’s probably going to be some stuff after the whistle,” Nugent-Hopkins told reporters this morning. “I think it’s important to stay poised out there and not retaliate and just play through the whistles and let the other stuff just kind of happen.”

Oilers head coach Kris Knoblauch also noticed his team’s discipline. Playoff hockey is full of emotion, and keeping those in check to focus on the larger goal is difficult. He was happy with how his team set the tone.

“It’s not necessarily easy to do,” Knoblauch said. “You get punched in the face and sometimes the referees feel it’s enough to call a penalty, sometimes it’s not… You just have to take them, and sometimes, you get rewarded with the power play.

“I liked our guy’s response and we want to be sticking up for each other, we want to have that pack mentality, but it’s really important that we’re not the ones taking that extra penalty.”

There is no doubt that the Kings will continue to poke and prod at the Oilers as the series continues. Keeping those retaliations in check will only get more difficult, but if the team can continue to succeed on the scoreboard, it could get easier.

 

728x90x4

Source link

Continue Reading

Trending