2024 Wimbledon Recap - Alcaraz on Top, WTA up for grabs plus Olympics talk - Presented by Chase

As 2024 Wimbledon comes to a close, Andy Roddick look back at the whole 2-weeks and talk through stories like Andy Murray's retirement, the usual WTA stars falling short, Carlos distancing himself from the rest of the top ATP players, and much more. Andy and Jon also talk through what's next for our the tour? The Olympics are only weeks away, the US Open to follow shortly after that. They talk who is poised to have a great rest of 2024 and who is searching for answers. Lastly, Andy and Jon discuss NCAA Tennis and it's place as the new Minor League since the recent NIL developments.

Brooklinen is a proud sponsor of Served! Visit their website and use code SERVED for $20 off your order of $100 or more: brooklinen.com

Served is sponsored by Olipop! Check out the link below and use the code: SERVED20 to get 20% off your order: https://drinkolipop.com/served20

Transcript

Speaker 1: 0:00

All right, welcome to Serve the Wimbledon Recap Show brought to you by Chase. We have been doing a lot of shows. If you watched our man, john Wertheim, the first week of Wimbledon, giving you eight minutes or more every single day, giving you the quick recaps even through the raindrops that were falling that week, and this week I've been doing a lot of match analysis recaps. Excuse me, but it's all been basically around matches right and previews of specific matches. Right now we want to take a full two-week look back. Take kind of like, let's pull out of the results in the brilliance of Kuchikova and Alcaraz and Novak getting to uh Wimbledon final and Paolini making her second straight Grand Slam final.

Speaker 1: 0:53

Let's look at the macro view. It feels like it was a million years ago, uh, that we were watching Andy Murray talk on center court, uh after his doubles match with with Jamie Murray and saying goodbye to Wimbledon. Uh, it felt like Radu Kanu was a contender for a second. That feels like a long time ago now, such is the world of grand slam tennis, where we have two weeks and right now I'm going to bring in, uh, the most exhausted man in tennis media. Uh, not sure how he does it, tennis channel. I know we're going to get the 50 parting thoughts and the si mailbag coming up very soon. I know people on uh twitter are already tapping their feet saying give us more, give the guy a break, let him give him a second, let him up for air. Our man, john, worth time. How was today, john?

Speaker 3: 1:34

uh, good day, very fun day. We uh, I think people came expecting a battle like last year. They got something very different, they got a master class in tennis. But I I don't see anyone going asking for a refund. Good day of tennis. And boy did Carlos Alcaraz leave his impression on the sport, this event, and I think everybody this is what always happens, right, everybody.

Speaker 1: 1:59

They wring their hands and it's raining and people are upset about schedules and their controversies, and then everybody leaves happy lesson there for all of us yeah, and and also let's not forget uh you know we often get to the, the tail end of saturday to sunday, and that's the only thing we can think about in the entire tournament, rightfully so is defined by who wins it, who makes finals. But there are other storylines, and week one, even with all the rain, was full of them, the smallest one not being Andy Murray and his legacy at Wimbledon. What will he leave behind? Disappointed, he didn't get to play singles, certainly an imperfect exit, but he had his moment, right. He had that moment on center court where people got to appreciate him and where he got to say his thank yous. That had to be the leading story of the first couple of days of the tournament, right, john?

Speaker 3: 2:50

Absolutely. I mean, bear in mind, Carlos Alcaraz has now won more majors than Andy Murray. So Andy.

Speaker 3: 2:54

Murray had a great career. Andy Murray did. He'll be in the Hall of Fame, but in terms of sheer numbers, this is not someone who's going up on Mount Rushmore and yet, in a way, he is, and I thought it was a real testament to the impact he had on the culture, his popularity among his peers, which is something that all reasonable people ought to be striving for. This is someone who had a big, big impact. He was not Nadal, fedor Djokovic we could argue big three, big four, but I'm really struck by what a profound impact he had on the sport. Yeah, did some winning, broke the British drought, won three majors, but this is someone who's whatever the cliche is his impact outstripped his raw achievements.

Speaker 1: 3:41

Yeah, and I also think he's someone that won us over right. It wasn't this Alcaraz relationship where he comes out he is so brilliant and we all just immediately fall in love with the product that he's giving on court. You know, murray, it was weird. He was perfect in a lot of areas decision-making, work, ethic, effort and then imperfect in a lot of areas too, which I think if you give it enough time and scale back, actually becomes kind of endearing. You know he, he yells at his box but he never takes a play off.

Speaker 1: 4:11

Uh, you know the, the, the microscope that was on him never really wilted, never really complained about it. I think he knew what it was but didn't shy away from the challenge of of breaking, uh, the title streak on the men's side from the 20s and just. I think also his popularity is largely centered around that drought and being the guy to take on the monster of pressure that exists for him in that market and doing it and beating Novak Djokovic in straight sets to do it and then adding another one on winning, uh, you know, olympic gold medals and and everything else and just generally yeah, exactly, and and just generally going about it in the right way.

Speaker 1: 4:53

Um, struggling through injury has not been the same player, obviously, like nobody. You know, if you have, you know, one hip, you're not going to be as good as when you have two hips, um, but I just think I sent him a text, uh, you know one of those days, and just basically gave my respect and said I always respected the way that you went about it, um, I. I think his, his on-court persona, kind of being the surly angsty, grumpy guy, is not what he is in my experience. Away from the court he's always up for a joke. He'll tell you, uh, he'll shred you to your face with a dry tone and you'll realize like 12 seconds later that he just annihilated you in good fun. But I always enjoyed that. I always enjoyed being around Andy Murray.

Speaker 1: 5:32

I'm glad he got this send off. It is well-deserved. Not everyone in history is going to be Serena Novak, roger Rafa, et cetera, et cetera. And we don't have to be. We can have the greats that aren't the greatest, right, we can have greats that aren't the greatest, uh, any, murray, certainly one of the greats of tennis. He will be missed. I know we will see him. Uh, I think he's scheduled to play the Olympics, um, but him at Wimbledon.

Speaker 1: 5:59

Uh, that's peanut butter and jelly.

Speaker 3: 6:00

That's where that's what we're going to remember. Um, he, he had his moment. I'm happy for it. Uh, what were the other focus points of uh of week one? Jw, I think wimbledon was a big winner. Of wimbledon, I mean, not a lot went right. Um sort of big picture. There we go.

Speaker 3: 6:17

Roger doesn't play anymore, rafa was nowhere to be seen, sabalenka, who some people picked to win this event, me, I didn't post, I didn't, I didn't post, she didn't post. We had injuries, we had rain, the weather wasn't great and you know, we had an election in the UK. We had the Euros siphoning attention, and you know what this event did. Just fine, this is an absolute premier sporting event. It almost doesn't matter who's on the court. There were celebrities, but you know what? There also were People that paid 35 bucks and waited in the rain to get through the gates. Nobody left disappointed. This is really just an exquisite place and it's built to the. It's almost results neutral at this point. So I think I think Wimbledon, in a weird way, is a big winner. What else we had? You know we can get into this later, but sort of the looming specter of the Olympics, which is a little strange. Everybody sort of they transitioned from clay to grass and now they've got to transition back to clay.

Speaker 3: 7:12

In the TV compound, ash Barty and Nick Kyrgios made an impression and I think a positive one on this tournament and I think there was no crazy emir Emma Raducanu, from the qualifiers to winning the title I mean there were no stories quite like that, but there were a lot of sort of nice, pleasant stories tucked in there, whether it was Lulu Sun qualifying and getting to the second week and beating Raducanu, whether it was these young French kids who were absolutely delightful In the end. We're going to remember this for Carlos Alcarez, who was just here, actually in this very seat about 20 minutes ago, and he is lovely. I think he got a little tongue-tied. I don't know if he caught his speech. He was much more effusive and fluid sitting here with some time to cool off than he was giving that post-match address in English. But there's literally nothing not to like about this guy.

Speaker 3: 8:06

We were all sort of worried about what was going to happen to the sport after the big three and we've gotten our answer resoundingly. But no, I mean there were no crazy controversies. There was no. Oh, this is going to be the Capriati Open. I mean sometimes one player hijacks an event. I don't think we necessarily had that, but overall very successful Wimbledon. Now everybody can barely take a few days off and we get another big event before the US Open, going back to Roland Garros for Paris 2024.

Speaker 1: 8:32

And you had a story on the double side that you were a fan of.

Speaker 3: 8:36

For those listeners, tell us your favorite double story of Wimbledon on the men's doubles side I think I mean bigger picture doubles is in a bit of a precarious state, especially on the men's side. I mean, this is always an agenda item. It was actually the most recent ATP board meeting sort of had some of these. What do we do about doubles discussions? But in the doubles side we had this crazy match between Helio Vara and Patton against Jordan Thompson and Max Purcell, two credible singles players. You ask who is Patton? Probably haven't heard that name, with good reason.

Speaker 3: 9:12

He played at UNC Asheville and was then the courtside statistician for IBM during this very event IBM during this very event. And a few years later he is winning the men's doubles title with Helio Vara, who also had a moonlighting job. He was in charge of passenger complaints at the Helsinki airport. So you've got one guy who's like charting a. Honestly, this is all sidebar conversation. I don't know if this speaks well of doubles and it could accommodate these kinds of backstories, or maybe it doesn't reflect great on the product that the guy who's telling people to go to gate 11 and here's a meal voucher while your flight is delayed, and the other guy who's saying was that an error or an unforced error? Those two guys are teaming to win Wimbledon. But yeah, you had a very unlikely men's doubles championship Ilya O'Bara and Patton, one of whom was charting aces not that long ago and the other was doing customer relations in an airport. I can't even say it without laughing. They're Wimbledon champions for the rest of their lives.

Speaker 1: 10:20

Well, that makes two of them. I guess that must feel nice. Maybe I went the wrong route. Maybe I should have sidestepped the lifetime of training and I should have been better at math, apparently, and known my way around at an airport. Listen.

Speaker 2: 10:39

I don't know. I saw you hit recently, Andy. I feel like maybe this is your path forward.

Speaker 1: 10:44

What is Doubles Pass? There you go Pass Hard pass.

Speaker 2: 10:44

Recently, andy, I feel like you, should, you should. Maybe this is your path forward. What is doubles pass? Pass hard, pass hard pass on that great story it is.

Speaker 1: 10:52

It is a great story. This is why we like sports and also it changes the macro conversation about doubles exactly zero. And listen, hate to be, hate to be the heavy, uh. But this sort of story proves a lot of the negative stereotypes, uh, or or at least storylines uh, about doubles.

Speaker 1: 11:11

A double specialist kind of used to mean if you're like in the eighties and the nineties, seventies, it used to mean you were better at doubles than you were at singles. So you had people like Richie Renenberg and Jim grab who were maybe 20, 25 in the world. Our friend Gigi Fernandez was a top 20 player in the world in singles. Natasha Zvereva was a doubles specialist who, oh, by the way, also made a singles final at Roland Garros. Now, dubious distinction of getting beat 0-0 in that final, but still the Woodies, woodford and Woodbridge outside of the Bryans probably the best doubles team of all time each made a semifinal in singles in singles at a Grand Slam. So the word specialist over time has changed from you're just probably a little bit better at doubles to you don't even sniff the draw in singles and it's not close.

Speaker 1: 12:05

Is there a life for that? Can that live on tour? Um, as you know what, what is a uh uh? You know a kind of a tour that's propped up by another tour. Um, you know, we'll, we'll, we'll see what those decisions are. And there's going to be a lot of. You know, you get texts and they're going to say, well, we're friends and I play doubles Great. But that doesn't change the macroeconomics of it and I like playing it, it's fun and people are like, yeah, but 90% of people play doubles, that's great. You don't go to an NBA game. You don't go to an NBA game. You go there to watch Steph Curry drain shots from 28 feet. You go there to watch LeBron James cover 20 yards in three steps. You don't go there to watch. You know them play like you. You just don't.

Speaker 3: 12:52

That's not what you pay for we should get on with our Wibble and Recap. But now this is total pet peeve of mine. You know, most people play basketball three-on-three shirts and skins. What people do recreationally doesn't really have any bearing on what people want to see as fans. All right, anyway, we can save a discussion, I think.

Speaker 1: 13:09

I can simultaneously think it's an amazing story and also uh be very curious to what the conversations are about uh the future of doubles, and I think there's a realistic view uh on on both sides of it. Maybe we should just kind of calmly talk through uh balls and strikes uh in two. Coming back, we're going to get to a break here in a second on serve, presented by Chase. Segment two we're going to go into the women's draw and a little more in-depth talk. Krichikova, her route, what she looked like, how unpredictable it all was, how bad we were in predicting it. But hey, I think we were all bad. But one of the things we got right 30, some odd people that we thought had a chance of winning the title. Number 31 wins. We'll be right back after this break. You All right. Everyone, welcome back to Serve, presented by Chase JW.

Speaker 1: 14:43

Let's take a little bit of a deeper dive into the two weeks of the women's event. I think the overriding storyline start to finish. The only consistent talking point that made sense the entire time was actually because of the inconsistencies presented by the field on this surface. Actually because of the inconsistencies presented by the field on this surface. Going in, listen, we had a dumpster fire of draws, as I think did most people. Not a lot of people had Kruchikova and Paolini, who had never won a grass court match before the season. In the final, what we did say was I think this is the most wide-open draw that I've ever seen on the women's side, based on surface, based on who was playing well, based on injuries and based on the most dominant player in the world not liking this surface in Iga Sviantek. So we had the thought process right and the guessing wrong, but as you kind of work through the storylines of the last two weeks on the women's side, what stands out?

Speaker 3: 15:38

We have this bias. We really sort of dislike parity. We like a cluster at the top right. We like when there's excellence, we like the big three. It's fun storylines. But basically we don't really like any given Sunday in sports right. We like a clear and we sort of came. We were anointing this big four in women's tennis, these four players at the top of the heap. They've really distanced themselves from the rest of the pack. There's a long staircase down after these big four players. And what happened? We come here to grass and Iga, who's been dominating the sport, she's fresh from this triumph yet again at Roland Garros. It's just the year she finally solves the grass riddle. No, it is not. She not only lost to Putin-Sava but really retreated. This was like the Homer Simpson meme when he sort of backs into the bush. I mean this was really. This wasn't just a loss.

Speaker 3: 16:34

This was like a capitulation to Putin-Sava who, by the way had won a grass court event coming in.

Speaker 3: 16:37

Right, right, but she did not build on that. And again, if you're going to go down in three sets to Sabalenka in the semis, that's fine, but this was not a good tournament for Iga. It wasn't a good tournament for Sabalenka. She did not post Robachina, I would say not. You know, she got through the first five rounds with something she hasn't always done. Her body held up, but she retreated a bit against Kujikova in the semis. That was a match she probably should have won. On paper. She was everyone's favorite after the quarters and she couldn't close. Coco had her issues too. That forehand really got picked on by Amanabaro. And then you know, I think you sort of look at this big picture and suddenly it's been two years since Robocato has been on the board. Iga has one major out. She's great on clay, right, I mean just she's headed toward Chrissy, if not Rafa, numbers on clay. But outside of clay she's only won one major and she sure hasn't done much damage here at this, at this pinnacle event. And again, not a great event for Coco after the promising first week. And suddenly you're left with wait. A second. Barbara Krujicova has now won two majors. Well, that's as many as Sabalenka, that's more than Robocan and Coco. And oh yeah, she's also won as many off of Clay as Iga. So in a very short amount of time I think we've gone from a big four to a world of parity. We'll see what happens the rest of the season.

Speaker 3: 18:02

There were some nice stories tucked into the women's. Emma Navarro was a great revelation, but then she didn't really have much against Paolini. Paolini continued great. I mean, she was sort of in the story of the year so far on the women's, but you couldn't quite close in the final. And a little bit of the same on the men's side, where you know the French kids. We had a couple of nice players making nice showings but not really leaving their mark on the tournament. But I think on the women's side I don't know. I mean, should we call this a one-off? And grass is a fluky surface and it gets even more fluky with injuries and rain. Or is the WTA not quite as stratified as we think it is? And this big four we've all been pushing really isn't quite as big as perhaps we would all like it to be?

Speaker 1: 18:46

yeah, it seems like we all just need very strict guidelines, like it's the big four, so we should only deal with these four, like that happened, the moment in history we had the big three and now all of a sudden, I feel like we need to assign big to whoever's playing well and then argue about who's not in it. A couple of things that made this, I think, into a super fluky event. One. I think the field from you know five to 30, you know 30 in the rankings, or Kruchikova at 31,. There are a lot of players there's 10, 12 that are very fluent on this service, where they say, okay, this is probably my favorite service. I'm thinking you know ostapenko. Uh, I'm thinking, uh, you know kuchikova, obviously very fluent. Radhikanu likes this surface maybe more than any other surface, even including the same thing. So I think it's a combination. I also think your your odds on favorite, just based on game and form.

Speaker 1: 19:37

Pulls out on sat, saturday before the tournament. Talks about a shoulder injury late on a Friday, you know, basically to make us understand how serious it is. Saturday pulls out. That blows open the field as well. Someone fills her spot, but the draw is already kind of messed up a little bit. You know Rabakina is there. It's weird whenever anyone kind of shifted into that favorite. Once you know fiatek loses sabalenka's out, all of a sudden we're going well, don't bet against coco. Here she comes, navarro beats her, and then we're going okay, navarro, and then navarro loses one and two. So it's just like it was. It was bananas trying to base anything on on form, on record. A couple of variables with that One shortened grass court season makes it really hard to decipher who's real and who's not based on form coming into the surface. Another thing that's not talked about enough when you get fluky results.

Speaker 1: 20:33

They basically played two different tournaments in this event. The first week was an indoor tournament for a lot of the showcase matches, very different Ball strikers, paradise Ball comes down, does it, and then all of a sudden you throw in a little bit of air, a little bit of wind. The movement becomes different. It's a lot more, it's slipperier when you're inside. So it's basically playing two completely different surface types the indoor grass versus the outdoor grass. Uh, you know, navarro plays against Coco and it's very different than when you walk outside. Um, it just is, that's the way it works. We're back. Another same thing. All of a sudden it's the heat of the day and critique of a service getting through a little bit easier, um, and she's having to move and get exposed and you know it's a little bit quicker, the ball flies off the racket a little bit more.

Speaker 1: 21:18

So I think this was like the perfect scenario, uh, for chaos on this side of the draw, and I guess it takes someone like a critique about who is. This known entity is not going to get freaked out by being the round of 16, quarter semis, final of of a grand slam has been there before. Uh, at scale, I still think the top four, the big four, the best players, are still the best players and they will be consistently, week in and week out. You don't have to be better than someone all the time. You have to be better for someone in pockets, and Kuchikova has proven that she can do that when she finds form and that she is dangerous and that her game is complete.

Speaker 1: 21:57

You're not going to put Kuchikova on any surface and she's going to go. I have no idea what to do on this surface. I was on clay. I'm going. I have to make 17 adjustments to this surface. She can adjust, but she has the ability, the well-rounded game to adjust easier. So shocking kind of. And then also you're going yeah, duh. Obviously, the person who can deal with different scenarios, different types of surfaces, different players in a world full of chaos is going to be measured and successful uh, quick krujicova story.

Speaker 3: 22:29

Um, so last year bandrosova wins and gets this wimbledon tattoo to celebrate and sort of half jokingly, krujicova came here, um, after she won the title, I said, hey, listen, last year another Czech won and she got a tattoo. Where's your tattoo going? And you would have thought I'd said you know what time does you know the blood drinking ritual begin? Like it was the craziest question, like inconceivable. She had this look on her face like what the hell? And then she said you know, ha ha ha, I'm much more traditional than that. No tattoo for me. That's not my personality.

Speaker 3: 23:01

And I'm thinking like, actually she kind of revealed something right there, you know, with respect to her tennis, which is she's not going to get too high, she's not going to get too low, she's not wild out there, she keeps things in a pretty condensed, compressed zone and that's good enough to win you majors. So if you can, you know, hit the ball the way she has and has that kind of variety that she has, and she can come to the net. But if she also has that kind of temperament, the anti, I mean. You don't usually think of tattoo as like a barometer of athletic success one way or the other. But, um, I think the fact that she's as measured as she is in this era, that's actually a real virtue and asset and not the reason why she has two majors, but I think it's a component.

Speaker 1: 23:43

Yeah, a beautiful storyline too with her. Not beautiful, obviously, a painful, but a beautiful tribute to Yana Novotna and the work that she put in with Barbara Kuchikova. Obviously an important event for Yana. I remember watching in 94 when it got away from her. I remember watching in 98 when she finally delivered that victory and that was very emotional. I know Krichikova has been effusive, as she should be, to the supports and the lessons that Novotna has given her. So hopefully she is looking down and proud of what she was a part of.

Speaker 1: 24:16

Other thing, krichikova and I never want this to be undersold, ever Krichikova's journey was probably going to end in Newport at the hall of fame. It, it, it will end in Newport in the hall of fame someday when she's done, obviously, two majors career, her ranking number two, uh, a bunch of doubles, titles, right, grand slam she's won Wimbledon twice in doubles. Those factors lead up to a Hall of Fame resume. So let me be the first to congratulate you on getting into the Hall of Fame, because I truly, with all of my soul, believe that that will happen. You asked the question is it the big four still that we're focused on? Is there a level of parity that for the rest of the year will extend down the rankings to number 30 for contenders. How do you see it playing out specifically on the WTA tour towards the end of the year? Jw?

Speaker 3: 25:07

Let's table the Olympics and let's see. The US Open is our next big test, and some of this is about health. Will Sabalenka, who desperately wanted to play here and just couldn't? Will she be healthy? Remember, she came within a few games of winning the US Open. It's a big deal if she is or isn't in the tournament. Coco is defending the title. At times Coco has looked terrific, other times it looks like that forehand is going to create a lot of problems for her. Can Emma Navarro build on the secrets out? The book on her is out. She's legit. How legit. And when the tour comes to the United States and there's a lot more exposure and a lot more pressure and a lot more sort of incentive for her, will that help her game?

Speaker 3: 25:47

Can Jasmine Paolini this is a sentence I did not envision saying a few months ago can Jasmine Paolini make her third straight major final? And then, can Iga recover from grass? And this, this was again. I thought this was a real step back event for her. I don't want to sound too harsh and critical for such a dominant player, otherwise, but um, for someone we were saying, oh, she finally solved the riddle, she has not. Those puzzle pieces are, uh, still scattered on the coffee table, but she'll get a chance to win a major. She has won before.

Speaker 3: 26:16

So I think there are a lot of storylines. There are a lot of players who I think have a chance to. I don't want to say salvage, but is 2024 going to be a successful year or an unsuccessful year? And I think there are a lot of sort of hovers. Jasmine Paolini could quit playing and it's a great year, but she's the exception. For most players it's been eh, eh, eh. I mean the US Open, I think, will have a lot of bearing on whether it's a good year for Player X or not. A good year.

Speaker 1: 26:43

Listen, we come into Wimbledon. We've talked ad nauseum about the question marks surrounding the women's draw. Is that fun, is it not? These question marks will persist. How does Coco back up last summer? How does she adjust to the obvious game planning that people are employing against her? Does Sabalenka's shoulder come around? Is Rabakina someone that is a number one type player in the world? I tend to think she's still going to win more slams for sure. Ego on hard, the inconsistencies early in some of the slams outside of Roland Garros, if we're nitpicking, which, at a certain point, you're being discussed against your own shadow, of which she has created a very, very large one. So, yeah, I think for the rest of the year it's going to be very exciting. I don't know that anyone with any sort of certainty can say this is exactly how it's going to play out, but that's what makes it fun. On the other side of the break, we will talk and take a look backwards at the two weeks of the men's draw. Talk a little bit more Carlitos. Talk a little bit more Joker. We'll be right back after the break. This is Served, presented by Chase. All right, welcome back to Serve, presented by Chase.

Speaker 1: 28:00

The men's draw. Looking when we were going in at the draw show, the only real uncertainty as far as who the best players were on the surface, how it might shake out, was largely Novak's knee right. That dictated the uncertainty. When trying to make a prediction, you called Alcaraz winning the tournament, I called Novak making final, even when we didn't know if he was going to play in the in the event. So you were right Winner. Winner chicken dinner for JW.

Speaker 1: 28:40

Just talk through kind of the journey of this tournament from. You know, I don't want to say the intrigue around where Novak actually was. He went from, was he going to play to? Is he going to win his eighth Wimbledon in a very, very short amount of time? Obviously about Murray Alcaraz getting a scare from Francis Tiafoe along the way, medvedev proving that he can beat anyone on a given day again, but is he just not as physically gifted as as the people that he is trying uh to beat? And then novak doing novak type things, basically with zero training, coming in and making uh a wimbledon final. How was the men's draw as you saw it?

Speaker 3: 29:16

uh, all of this in hindsight is a lot easier to do than when we sat here 17 days ago when the draw came out and we tried to play Forecaster. In some ways, I think this really was Carlos's tournament and despite his seating he was a defending champion. He came in with the buzz from the clay and there were times where he absolutely electrified the crowd and it was just his level was up here, and other times his level dropped and the fact that he could recover. He lost two sets to Francis. I mean, francis really had the sky on the ropes. He lost a set in the fourth round, a set in the quarters, a set in the semis. Then he comes out for the final against Novak, and that was just.

Speaker 3: 29:55

I'll tell you. I haven't heard your recap yet because it was just prior to this, but for all the shot making and all the sort of just, he did not just do that kind of reactions from the crowd. I just thought the fact that he squandered three match points in a Wimbledon final against, statistically, the greatest player of all time and basically was like oh, that sucks, I'll have to win him in a tiebreak. The fact that he reset in 20 minutes from what could have been an absolute, catastrophic missed opportunity. Serving on grass and you let a 40-love lead go out the door and the fact that 20 minutes later he's holding up the trophy, I just think that was to me more impressive than any run around the net forehand or any drop shot from two feet behind the baseline. I just thought that was really a statement. I think there are a lot of players that sort of had B-plus tournaments, that sort of had good progress. You know, ben Sheltman really struggled on the grass. He won a bunch of five-setters. He got to middle weekend. He didn't play to his. You know he didn't do what he did at the US Open. He didn't really announce himself. But you know, good tournament on grass, announce himself, but good tournament on grass.

Speaker 3: 31:02

Francis was in a real slump, taking two sets of Alcaraz. In retrospect talk about a loss that ages well. He played Carlos Alcaraz closer than anyone else in the draw. Good for Francis. Again didn't get out of the third round though. Taylor Fritz had a real signature win of his career. Came back two sets to love against Zverev. That is a big time win, regardless of surface. But then Taylor Fritz took a bit of a step back and lost a very winnable match against Mussetti.

Speaker 3: 31:26

So I think there were a lot of sort of I can come out of here with some positives, but nobody's really doing too many cartwheels, apart from Carlos Alvarez who I think really made a statement. I mean, this was his fourth major. It wasn't like who is a Spanish kid hitting the hell out of the ball. But I just think the fact that he could reset the fact that he was always smiling and having joy even while his level was dropping I mean there was one point at which he was broken three times in one set and he goes to sit down and his attitude isn't one of mortal fear or abject panic but of like boy, I was sure shit for those 30 minutes. I'll have to get better. I think this was a real statement tournament for him.

Speaker 3: 32:07

Again, you sort of go down the draw and there were very few players who just bombed out without any sort of everyone gets a trophy era. A lot of moral victories along the way. Hey, daniil Medvedev beat Sinner. That's a nice win. If you're Yannick Sinner, you say you know what? I didn't win a major, but I played pretty well and I fought through a match when I was hurt. Got to the, you know, got to the quarters, that ain't bad. So I think for most players there's sort of this how positive am I going to let myself get? How am I going to spin this? Um, but boy, I just think Carlos was just in so many levels and so many dimensions and so many ways, from playing out of the doldrums during matches to that performance in the final, which was just dazzling. Uh, I think he is our big winner in more ways than one.

Speaker 1: 32:58

Yeah, and the thing that I love watching is when you watch Carlos, especially when he was. I remember watching that US Open match against Tsitsipas when he just was all just raw aggression and ability and upset him for the first time I think it was three or four years ago Hitting forehands at 100 miles an hour. You're going. Oh my gosh, this kid's. Just the raw parts of him were always extremely obvious. Right, there's the, the, the. The most obvious parts aren't the subtleties right Of like a Novak and how he is a tactician. Novak's like a wrestler he gets you into certain holds and you can't get out and it's not like this Tyson fight, right. And so watching Carlos improve, even from last year, right, is something that is just blowing my mind. I mean, you talk about the confidence. Is that that's earned, not given that he can smile away a bad set? I get jealous when I hear that, because I didn't have that confidence in my own options or abilities ever in my entire life. I'm like, oh my God, I might never win a set again.

Speaker 1: 34:04

Uh, but Carlos Alcaraz, the serve today in the or in the Wimbledon final. I think it was the best I've ever seen Carlos Alcaraz serve from an execution standpoint and from a mentality standpoint, right Strategically, wasn't hitting random like 97 mile an hour serves, that he calls mix-ups, that just weren't. He went and knew he had to hear the, the, the, the mentality to go out and win points on his serve today. And and he did. And you know said in the preview show if he got close to 60% first serve percentage he was going to win Um. He clocked in at 50, 59%, won 84% of his first serve percentage. He was going to win um. He clocked in at 50 59, won 84 of his first serve points against the best return against novak, yeah, against the best returner of all time, defended his second serve above a 50 clip on against novak on grass.

Speaker 1: 34:56

That is phenomenal, uh, the way that he's rounded out the bottom of his service motion. I'm sure they haven't or won't talk. They haven't talked about it. It's obvious from where I said. It used to be kind of straight up and down, it looked more like a V.

Speaker 1: 35:08

This, the bottom, is like more rounded out. The shoulder gets around. Therefore he's able to get a little bit more movement or tail. So, example being, if he's hitting T on the ad side of slice serve, it's turning a little left. By the time it gets to Novak right, it's turning a little left where the up and down motion means that he was serving straight on. He could still hit a spot, but it wasn't moving, it didn't have that Sampras swing at the end of it. This rounded out service motion. It's not a coincidence that when he was hitting his spots it wasn't getting firmed up today. That's not like an accident that his spots it wasn't getting firmed up today. That's not like an accident. That's not because Novak had knee surgery. That's because he has added something to his serve, Uh, even since the beginning of the year in January, when Zverev was squaring up every single return. Uh in Australia. Go ahead, John.

Speaker 3: 35:53

Did you see book of Mormon? Yes, yes so.

Speaker 3: 35:56

I'm thinking what your, your, your breakout here? I'm thinking like, remember, way back in 2023? It's like you're describing a completely different player. I mean this is not the conversation that we had a year ago today, when, oh yeah, he won the title. The way he is, I mean I don't know what the now the vat of grapes that has turned to wine, sure did not take, sure did not take a long time. I mean this is a completely alien conversation to what we would have said a year ago here. The way he has matured tactically and logistically, it's, it's really extraordinary to watch.

Speaker 1: 36:32

Yeah, another, another thing that he wasn't doing two years ago even is and we talked about this quickly in the the recap show even is, and we talked about this quickly in the uh the the the recap show. But for those who didn't see it, there were eight or nine times today where he got caught looking back in on a return. Novak went forehand and he chipped the ball down, got neutral to stay alive in a rally, grinds out four or five of those points that didn't exist really two years ago. It was feast or famine, right. The nuances of basically reading the game better and then in the moments where you don't reacting better, to give yourself a chance, like if you're giving yourself a look three, four, five more times when you get beat strategically or you don't read a serve correctly per set. That's the difference between a straight set win in a five set per set. That's the difference between a straight set win in a five set Epic. And that's something that Novak has mastered over the years. He reads it better, but then he adjusts better. When he's looking fastball and someone throws a change up, he still gets a single right. That is what Carlos Alcaraz is learning and that we're seeing in real time. It's not that Novak. Oh well, he just missed balls. No, he had to play like we're seeing in real time. It's not that Novak, oh well, he just missed balls. No, he had to play like 20% more. That has a cumulative effect on a match, obviously.

Speaker 1: 37:47

Also during the recap show I talked about people like, oh, maybe his knee wasn't good today. Listen, novak came out and was aggressive, did not want extended rallies with this guy. He was going line early. He was serving volleying, like we had talked about yesterday. But we also discussed in our preview JW moving comfortably on a knee right where you can kind of feel predict the pacing where the shots are going to go. You're playing a deep cross court. You know that your opponent doesn't have the ability to one hit a drop shot in any place and two hit a deep winter to any spot right. That's a different level of stress test, not on the knee as an injury, but on a fitness level.

Speaker 1: 38:27

Coming in, novak had no reps, no fitness. All he was trying to do was get healthy enough to play his first round and then after that healthy enough to play second round, so on and so forth. So for people to say, oh, he wasn't moving great, well, no kidding, you have to practice to be great at something and through no fault of his own, he didn't have those quick, quick reps. And when you get to the top level of the game, those little things, those margins, those three or 4% I'm moving 5% worse than I normally do because of my fitness level or because of no reps those get exposed quickly. I think that's what happened today. I think people saying, well, novak was too aggressive, he missed too much, he knows more than you, he knows more than me, he knows whether or not he has the movement to go toe-to-toe in extended rallies with Alcaraz my on his. His strategy, coming forward, going line early, was that he didn't have confidence making those quick adjustments and, uh, you know, carlos, uh exposed him, went big when he had to hit those drop shots. When he had to, uh, took second serves early. Uh, you know, crush and rush over and over, did not want Novak to get settled. And then, when Novak had a shot because he was unsettled, uh, maybe pull the trigger a little bit too quickly. But props to Alcaraz. It's an absolute, it's absurd that Novak was able to make the final of this event. Surgery, no fitness, not a lot of tennis, no matches. Finals of Wimbledon. Gave yourself a look at the basket. So props to him as well.

Speaker 1: 39:59

Sinner's interesting case moving forward. He's number one in the world, but does he feel like it right now? He would probably tell you that he's not the best player in the world right now. Alpha of two straight majors. Uh, from Carlos Alcaraz, I don't think anyone would say that. Um, you know he's getting credit for, you know, post September through March, which he should. That's, that's the way it works. But there is a race for world number one in the year-end world number one and Alcaraz has firmly planted himself right in it. I'd look for Sinner to get back out there sooner rather than later. Medvedev is an interesting case and I kind of relate to his situation, probably more than most than most. Um, you know he's, he's a former number one, he is a us open champion and he can beat people in majors on a given day. It's hard to beat three greats in a row. It's just a huge ask yeah, uh, I mean, that's.

Speaker 3: 40:55

That's part of this too right, part of this is just uh, this is just a probability exercise. And look at medvedev's draw and it would have been extraordinary for him to have done much more than he had to. Medvedev in grass. It's getting better, it's still. There are times where you know, sometimes he looks great, other times he looks a little bit clueless. I also think let's table this for another conversation and not do it on a Wimbled and recap. But I have a friend who had zero dog in this fight, not even a big tennis fan, no reason to lie who swears that medvedev used the f-word and not the russian epithet he claims to have used. Uh, that was sitting courtside and heard this. Um, I do think, yeah, there's a discussion to be had about yeah, I said I did this.

Speaker 1: 41:39

Yeah, because he said f? U f? U f? U piece of shit no, he didn't, though.

Speaker 3: 41:44

He said a russian epithet that you didn't understand, because you and I don't speak russian. Um, you know what?

Speaker 1: 41:50

here, here, till. This is only for youtube viewers. It's going to be awkwardly silent for the next 12 seconds. I'm going to move my mouth the way he moved his mouth for that uh, russian epithet. You ready? So that that's the way. That that's the way, apparently, your mouth do a lingo russian?

Speaker 3: 42:09

and when did you learn so much russian, dude?

Speaker 1: 42:11

apparently your mouth moves the exact same way for the russian epithet as it does when you say f? U f? U f? U piece of shit. So you learned something new. Maybe that's the takeaway from the last two weeks, who knows?

Speaker 3: 42:22

um, hey, so sometime on a slow week in like october, we'll talk about whether rules ought to be uniformly applied or whether we like the fact that there's discretion and we don't have someone defaulted in the semifinals of Wimbledon. But if, yeah, I mean you go read his press conference. He said something very different from what this source of mine heard. But I don't, he's, he's such a good guy, I mean I, I'm willing, I feel like reputations at some point accumulate and matt. Anyway, let's, let's table that for now. But uh, this could have been, but point being too, this could have ended really badly for him if he said what people like yourself and my friend uh believe he said. This could have been a real controversy, but as it is, uh, he did not surmount carlos alcaraz, but that again, no, no one else did either.

Speaker 1: 43:06

Yeah, I like Medvedev. I like all of his antics. I'm here for it, and also bro we know what you said.

Speaker 1: 43:14

We need to spend a second and congratulate Lorenzo Mussetti Coming into the grass court season. I don't know that. I had him making finals of Queens and semis of Wimbledon on my bingo card, so props to him for figuring out the grass. It's nice to see people kind of figure out a surface in real time. Curious to see if that kind of launches him into this. He's a guy that's been around for a long time, super flashy, super talented.

Speaker 3: 43:39

He's younger than Sinner.

Speaker 1: 43:41

I know, but sustained. Yeah, I know it feels like he's been around forever, but like, but sustained, it feels like he's been around forever, but sustained. Quality control is something that we will look for with him. Let's see if he can build on this Quickly, someone who I think doesn't fit into the thing of like. Oh, everyone did pretty well.

Speaker 1: 43:57

I think Tommy Paul kind of announced himself this month, winning Queens quarterfinals against Alcaraz, playing a tough four-setter, going toe-to-toe with him for the first two sets. Tommy Paul feels better about his game than he did a month ago. And then he did a month before that, a month before that and a month before that A real player, real contender in these tournaments. Now we hope Taylor Fritz gets better than knee injury at the end of the Musetti match, which he was going to already lose. He was down, you know way down in the fifth set. We hope he gets healthier.

Speaker 1: 44:29

Ben Shelton should be licking his chops for the American summer hardcourt season. His second serve is something that nobody wants to see starting off his summer campaign in Atlanta, as well as Francis Tiafoe. Francis Tiafoe turned his year of form around in this event, so we're talking about people that okay, francis, making the third round of a major. We've seen it before, but he played 300 times better slight exaggeration only this tournament and kind of found his way, got through a tough first rounder, played a good second rounder and then gave the best player in the world hell for four hours on center court and maybe could have been unlucky to not get the win. So props to Faux. I hope he keeps bringing the heat to round up the American side of the men's.

Speaker 3: 45:20

Let me finish up real quick with Faux. There might be a. I got to be a little careful here. There may be a coaching announcement coming. We'll see if I'm his new coach.

Speaker 3: 45:31

The first thing I say is watch this match against Carlos Alvarez. Look how close you came, Look how many opportunities you gave yourself, Look how you were not, not not only sort of you, you were a comparable athlete, but you could hang with him in the rallies. You were the better player for, certainly chronologically, for the better half of that match. This is what you need to do week in, week out, and it's great to do it against Carlos Alcaraz on a big court with a big chance of an upset. How do we somehow channel all of that and have that come out on a Tuesday in Cincinnati?

Speaker 3: 46:06

And I think that Carlos I mean you know Francis at a point in his career where you just can't play the way he's been playing. I mean he used the word clowns and it made for a couple of days worth of headlines. But I think the larger point there is you've got to figure out a way to replicate the intensity and the level you had against Carlos. You know you only get a few of those swings. You've got to figure out how to do that week in, week out. And I think if I'm Francis's new coach, uh, I'm making him watch that Carlos match and then making him watch a match where he loses to his his word, a clown, on a Tuesday and say, how do we reconcile these two? What do you think?

Speaker 1: 46:41

Who's his new coach? Uh, I'm not at liberty to say but thought you were, I thought I was trying to go for. I was trying to go for word vomit there.

Speaker 3: 46:52

I thought I was going to win, um I actually I actually kind of disagree.

Speaker 1: 46:54

I don't think. I think, yes, we need to see that level more often. Um, the way I would present it to to francis is we need the work to be so consistent that the real victory was you playing terribly in the first round and finding a way to get through, to give yourself a chance to play better. Round two, you played well and then, all of a sudden, round three, you felt like it was riding a bike again. Right, you find the flow. How do we get through more round ones when you eke out a five set win? Uh, you know how do you play. Get the victories from the times where you're not feeling perfect, where you're not in the flow, where you don't have 15,000 people watching you.

Speaker 1: 47:33

He likes that show, he likes that atmosphere, he likes to do it. I would actually say the celebration, and the one we need to see more of, isn't the top level of your tennis. We've seen that. You've proven that when everything is in flow and you have, you know the tennis. We've seen that you've proven that when everything is in flow and you have, you know the you're you're part of the attention center. I'm not worried about you delivering. Then let's get through the ugly matches to give you more shots at that energy center is the way that I would kind of approach that. That, that conversation, uh, with big foe, uh, seb Korda. I love him on grass and he, he draws. You know the Ivo Karlovic situation where you can play badly and beat Ivo Karlovic. You can play well and lose to Ivo Karlovic just based on him holding serve. Lucky loser Paracard draw from hell goes down in a tough five setter. But hopefully from Sebi Korda the eye test is like you're a top 10, top 15 guy and I hope we get there. He certainly, I'm sure, is looking forward to the summer on the heels of a little bit of disappointment coming off of Wimbledon. But all hail, king Carlos.

Speaker 1: 48:36

Man Like this kid has all of it. He's the attitude, he has, you know the electric body that can move faster than maybe anyone we've seen this side of prime Hewitt it's. He has the variety. He can simultaneously bludgeon the ball and then hit a poetic half volley, flighted winner, drop shot. You know, two points later has a smile on his face Somehow. It's a very offensive to the people like, like myself, that played in kind of a miserable state, stressed out, state most of the time. The fact that he's always having fun is mildly offensive to the rest of us, but really fun to watch. Who doesn't love this kid? The game is in great hands. Props to Novak for giving us a show. I didn't see it coming after Roland Garros in knee surgery, making a grand slam final with zero practice, zero reps.

Speaker 1: 49:30

Let's take a quick look forward to the rest of the season. John Wertheim, after this confusing event. We knew everything. We knew all the favorites going into Roland Garros. They largely delivered. Come here, no one knows anything and we get chaos. What's in store for the rest of the year? What are the storylines that intrigue you? What are the biggest question marks for certain players moving forward through the US Open and the rest of the year?

Speaker 3: 49:55

I think just kind of stepping back. The big picture is the Olympics, and I saw a player sort of set me the rules and regulations and there's going to be coaching and there's not going to be technology on the net Remember, we had a good eye roll about that Looks like it's not going to be there for the Olympics either. There will be an on-site mental health professional, which I found interesting. But I think the bigger picture is, for some players, they begged off and they don't want to deal with it. For other players, carlos Alcaraz included, I mean, he was just here talking about how excited he is. He's going to stay in the village, he's going to meet other athletes, he really wants to win a medal for his country with Rafa. I'm really, I would say, surprised, but I do think it's interesting, the absolute sort of range of how much this matters.

Speaker 3: 50:44

Some athletes, this is equal to a major, others, they begged off and I'm curious if that was your experience. I don't know if that's, having the Olympics in Paris is an easy trip for some players and a pain in the ass for others. I don't know if it's, I've been there once. That's good enough, but I'm really sort of everyone comes to the majors. They want to win. It's a big deal, nobody denies these are the four tentpoles. The outcome, the range of opinions on the Olympics is all over the place and I'm curious if you have thoughts on that.

Speaker 1: 51:14

It's strange that the people that can definitely contend for the gold medal seem to be a little more enthusiastic about the Olympics. Just simply.

Speaker 3: 51:21

No, but not.

Speaker 1: 51:23

I mean some people want to take a walk in the opening ceremony.

Speaker 3: 51:27

Yeah, but also couldn't Hans Jaber on the clay of Paris where she trained as a child? Couldn't she be a contender? It was nothing to do with it. Couldn't Francis sneak out of that?

Speaker 1: 51:39

Well, no, he couldn't. On clay, no, I don't think so.

Speaker 1: 51:42

But Hans Jaber, yes, but is that time better spent? This is the entire conversation. Jabbour goes there for half of a chance at a medal or does she actually prepare and try to hunt down that first Grand Slam in New York? I think the choice is pretty clear. I'll tell you, I was all in on my first Olympics in 2004, had a great time, took an unfortunate loss to Fernando Gonzalez, watched one of my good friends, marty Fish, make a run to the finals. He almost won a medal. I had more fun that week being his practice partner and watching his matches.

Speaker 1: 52:16

I'll tell you what the reality is for. Like Novak's going to fill a resume thing, because that's the only thing he hasn't really done is win that Olympic gold in singles. It's just like. I don't think it's the same for tennis players, because I lost in 04 and I watched my fellow American teammates in different sports lose and it was the end of four years of work with. This moment can't be shot for again I'm making a life decision whether or not I pursue this opportunity again.

Speaker 1: 52:53

I got to go to New York and play the US Open like 10 days later. There's just different consequences and I think it's great. I think it's great that it's part of it. I think if it's the most important thing in Novak's year, I think that's fantastic for him. If Francis doesn't, if he values staying back and trying to make a run at the US Open, which we know he's capable of that seems like a rational decision. I don't think it's baked in. One decision fits all for everyone and therefore we can judge if they choose to do it or or not to do it. I qualified three times, I went twice, I recovered from an injury in 08 to my shoulder and decided to play two tour events instead so I could get matches to go into the U S open. And then in 2012, I was uh, I was more excited to play because it was played at that court behind you which I thought I had a real, real chance at.

Speaker 3: 53:51

So listen, think what you want, just don't judge too harshly and or if someone prioritizes it more than anything, that doesn't mean that everyone else has to. Yeah, no, I I mean I don't say it to to condemn or condone, I don't. I mean, players make their own schedules, lord knows, there's enough demand. I just think it's really interesting. I don't think it's necessarily obvious who's making what choices, but for some players this is everything and they're talking about staying in the village and they're talking about how can I get more tickets and can I purchase? I mean, for some players it's been a real topic of conversation and for others this may as well just be another summer event. So it's interesting to me that and it doesn't to me doesn't seem that there's that much predictability and logic to it. It's just, I mean just value neutral. It's just kind of interesting to me that some players really prioritize this. I mean, look at Rafa's playing as we, you know, as we almost speak, rafa's playing a clay event in Sweden to get in shape for the Olympics.

Speaker 1: 54:40

Doesn't that kind of prove my point, though, that the players who like the venue and the place and the surface are prioritizing it right, unless he could just as easily say look, I've won my medals I'm 38 years old.

Speaker 2: 54:54

Skip the venue behind you, so he could go play on clay in paris again yeah, no, exactly um again, it's uh one one thought, one thought on it from this perspective is you know how much of this is also the current nature of the Olympics being so commoditized? You know, like how many of these people are making these appearances for exposure and for sponsor deals?

Speaker 1: 55:19

I don't know. I mean, that's every week though. I mean everyone's in their business regardless.

Speaker 1: 55:22

Listen, it's a huge factor in the summer we're going to have less of a read on who's playing while the the hard courts going in, because there's this big, massive event interruption in the middle of the year. We will see what happens. The transition from clay to hard to clay to hard, or sorry, clay to grass to clay to hard, is brutal. It's not like we need more reasons for tennis players' bodies to break down, especially after having watched the last two week at Wimbledon. Maybe someday we'll have an honest conversation about how that can be helped or fixed. Scheduling we will be back to close out the show. Segment four. Thank you for listening to Served. Presented by Chase. All right, you chuckers. As you know, I've had my battles with travel messing up my internal clock, but I found something that really helps Oslo sleep buds. These bad boys block out snoring bed partners and are way more comfortable than AirPods. Yes, I said it, you can easily side sleep in them With over 10 hours of battery life. They block out noise like a dream and come with specially designed noise masking tracks to help you sleep soundly. I prefer, that's right, the babbling brook. Turn the Bluetooth on. You can stream anything. Turn Bluetooth off and they'll still play those masking sounds. They even have a built-in alarm to wake you up without disturbing your partner. And here's the kicker In an upcoming update, they'll detect when you've fallen asleep and automatically switch from streaming to noise. Masking Plus, full sleep tracking and analysis are coming soon. Right now you can save up to $120 if you pre-order them through our website, oslosleepcom. Don't you dare miss out, you chuckers.

Speaker 1: 57:17

All right, everyone. Welcome back to Serve, presented by Chase. Okay, jw, you don't know this. Let's see how good you are off the cuff. I don't know what this segment's gonna be. I think we've written down all of our good stuff. We've already gotten through our legal pads. Um, dealer's choice. What are we talking about in segment four?

Speaker 3: 57:39

oh man, uh, carlos alcares, he won the tournament we talked about that.

Speaker 1: 57:43

We talked about that already uh, okay, what about this?

Speaker 3: 57:46

you don't win a good tournament, college tennis.

Speaker 1: 57:50

Nice one, well done.

Speaker 3: 57:52

College tennis has a lot of good tournaments these days for a lot of reasons. One of them is that the playing careers are getting longer, so there's now new incentive to go to college and also have a backup plan. But yeah, I mean, college tennis is such a force in this sport right now and it used to be mostly in doubles, no longer. There was a point this weekend, middle weekend, three players from one school UVA Emma Navarro, daniel Collins, brandon Nakashima were all in the draw. Ben Shelton had a very nice tournament Again, all over the double trial. I would go a step further. I mean, martina has a whole. You know, lulu Sun, who made the middle weekend, was a breakthrough star. Beat Raducanu, she played number three at Texas. So you don't even have to be the star of your college team.

Speaker 3: 58:37

Martina's point, which I think is interesting, is that college players play singles and doubles. So A you have all of these doubles players who went to college. Doubles, so A you have all of these doubles players who went to college. But more importantly, the singles players, they know how to volley, they know how to hit overheads. Martina's point is that even when you warm up, you can tell which players have been working on their lobs and overheads and play doubles, which haven't.

Speaker 3: 58:56

College players understand rowdy environments. They don't mind when the fans are very close to the court or when they're shouting epithets or when they have flags of the opposing player. I also have noticed that college players are everywhere, not just on the court. A lot of agents went to college. A lot of coaches went to college. Emma Navarro's coach, for example, played at Duke in the 90s. There are college coaches who are college players that are now trainers. So the impact of college tennis on this sport not just in the double straw, which is what it was about 10 years ago, but throughout this whole ecosystem, I think is something that's positive and I think it's something we probably ought to talk about more. There are a lot of angles to this. A lot of these players are not necessarily American, which I know is an issue with some people, but big days for college tennis.

Speaker 1: 59:46

All right, let's distill this concept down into a question. Is college with NIL, et cetera, et cetera? Basically just the minor league system? For the tours now, or for coaching or for anything else, there is a payment situation. Now, or for coaching or for anything else, there is a payment situation. You play in small markets until you play in big markets. There is a logical path. If you're not ready when you're 17 or 18 years old, this is basically just a minor league system that you have to go to class every once in a while for too.

Speaker 3: 1:00:21

And if the answer is sure, so what I mean? I feel like, yeah, we're all creatures of incentives and I think some players are going because they want to read Sophocles and take introduction to gender studies. I think a lot of them are doing it with their tennis in mind and, you're right, it's not just NIL, which I think is probably exaggerated in non-revenue sports.

Speaker 3: 1:00:44

I don't think too many TCU tennis players are driving Florida football Lamborghinis, but I think the real money is in the training. Someone else pays for your travel. Hey, I broke a string on my racket. I don't have to pay the 50 bucks. I've got players to hit with. I've got my transit paid for. If my coach sucks and it's a bad situation if I'm playing challenge, I'm in Tegucigalpa and I've got to figure out a way home. If I'm in a terrible college situation, you know what I do. I transfer and next semester I'm playing somewhere else where they're also giving me free travel and training and rackets and massages and health insurance. I think it's probably as an economic, you'd hope it doesn't crassly become this transactional. But even if we're just limiting this to economics and this is a better paying minor league, yeah, I still think it's a force of good oh, I thought I had you, and then you went and said everything that I wrote down damn it this is a scholarship.

Speaker 3: 1:01:40

I've never worked with this man.

Speaker 1: 1:01:42

This is this is a scholarship to img academies, training, everything else. Everything that you just said is the benefit of college tennis and, frankly, if you take people and there are enough talented ones and you put them in a very focused environment, players will come out. Players will come out. You're going to have Emma Navarro, you're going to have Danielle Collins, you're going to have John Isner, who is, by the way, going to be the guest on our show next week. So I want to have an in-depth, probably no better voice in in tennis or one of the better ones to talk about, uh, the differences between tour college, uh why that path was good for him. Uh, curious to hear uh his thoughts on it as well. Um, thought I was gonna stump you. I didn't know what you were coming with in segment four.

Speaker 1: 1:02:40

I think this is a very, very, very uh interesting conversation. That was white, right there for all to see. Uh, this Wimbledon in this fortnight with Lulu soon A little deceiving because Peyton Stearns was the best player in the country and she played behind her. So there were just multiple stars on that team, jw. But great job from the Tennis Channel desk. Good job, as always with your interviews. We appreciate your thoughts and insights. I do think there is a longer form conversation about the college tennis. Maybe we'll do it next week with John Isner. He is coming on, so we will see you next week, jw. Safe flight home. This has been Serve presented by Chase. Like, follow, subscribe on all of the things. Thank you for listening.