\u2022 In non-tennis news, why you should care about the helium shortage:<\/p>\n
\u2022 New Yorkers, note this pickleball 4 Parkinson\u2019s gala.<\/a><\/p>\n \u2022 In case you missed it, here is the Elina Svitolina\u2013Ga\u00ebl Monfils decoupling announcement<\/a>.<\/p>\n \u2022 Happy birthday<\/a>, Martina Navratilova.\u00a0<\/p>\n Onward \u2026<\/p>\n Hall of Fame<\/p>\n Let\u2019s start with the 2027 Hall of Fame nominations, which were released earlier this week<\/a>. (Fan vote is here<\/a>.) The headline is that Serena Williams, who initially stepped away from competitive tennis in 2022 and could have made a case for eligibility, wasn\u2019t on the ballot. Surely, that was her preference. And the obvious inference is that she will continue her comeback in 2027. Perhaps she doesn\u2019t want to muck up a potential U.S. Open preparation with a Hall of Fame induction. Perhaps she is waiting to be inducted alongside her sister. But it makes for a bit of intrigue.<\/p>\n \u200bA few of you asked how I intended to vote for the players on the ballot. The New York Times has a policy that its journalists are not permitted to vote for Halls of Fame. It\u2019s too messy, and there are too many potential conflicts. My take: It\u2019s not a conflict if you disclose your choices. Maybe it\u2019s because I\u2019m softening with age, or maybe because I\u2019m devoted to precedent. Perhaps it\u2019s because I\u2019m filled with respect for the four players on the roster, but I shall be casting four \u201cyes\u201d votes.<\/p>\n \u200bAsh Barty: This case scarcely merits mention. She was a dazzling player who won three majors, spent nearly two consecutive years ranked No. 1 and accumulated good-person points. It\u2019s a no-brainer.<\/p>\n \u200bJuan Mart\u00edn del Potro won only one major (the 2009 U.S. Open), though he beat (four-time defending champion) Roger Federer and Rafael Nadal back-to-back in the process. Before pivoting to the emotional points, note that he reached a half dozen major semifinals and advanced to the 2018 U.S. Open final. He won two Olympic medals and 22 titles. He did so in between a brutal stretch of injuries. Based on what was, not what could have been, I give him a slight nod. Add in that he did everything right and treated everyone right, and the tennis fates betrayed him, it seems only fair he gets this bit of grace.<\/p>\n As for Svetlana Kuznetsova, given precedent, it\u2019s hard to turn away a multiple-major winner, especially when she won two different majors (the 2024 U.S. Open and 2009 Roland Garros). In between? She had more than a dozen runs to major quarterfinals or better. She played a fine doubles game, reaching each major final at least once, and winning twice in Australia. She reached No. 2 in the rankings. And she did it all with real geniality and quirk. She gets my vote.<\/p>\n \u200bIn the wheelchair category is Shingo Kunieda of Japan. For the record, he won 50 major titles!<\/p>\n Q&A<\/p>\n Hello James,<\/p>\n I completely agree with you.\u00a0 What’s in a name? So Mister [Andrew Abdo<\/a>] called Jannik \u201cJacob\u201d… big deal! Btw, James, good luck to you and that former No. 1 fella Adam Riddick on the Served podcast.<\/p>\n Give my best to Albert Zorov on being No. 1!! Please ask Kiki Gaff to swing away! Hope Shabloinka makes it back to No. 1 some day.\u00a0<\/p>\n Best, \u2022 Well played. I, too, look forward to the return of Shabloinka. That made me laugh out loud and reminded me of this<\/a> Harvard Lampoon prank.<\/p>\n \u200bGetting someone\u2019s name right isn\u2019t just about professionalism, knowledge and credibility; it\u2019s about respect. My point: If tennis is going to recruit, accommodate and seek counsel from \u201coutsiders,\u201d we need to build in time for people to get up to speed. Calling Jannik Sinner \u201cJacob\u201d is like an NBA executive calling the celestial Golden State Warriors guard \u201cSteven Curry.\u201d It\u2019s bad, and attempts to spin it make it worse. But let\u2019s not let a faux pas tank the career of someone who might (or might not) be a visionary leader.<\/p>\n Rafael J\u00f3dar is currently ranking No. 11 in the world. | IMAGN IMAGES via Reuters Connect<\/p>\n [Rafael] J\u00f3dar seems like a jerk. It is very tough to root for him. He is old enough to know that it is unacceptable to be abusive toward ball boys and girls. He has done this a few times. His apology was very fake and forced. He stated he would apologize if he ran into him. Usually players would make an effort to personally meet the ball kid and give him or her gifts if they made an unforced error by being abusive toward him or her. I’m sure someone in his camp told him he needs to apologize due to the public backlash. He definitely lost a good number of fans.\u00a0<\/p>\n Sunny \u2022 The extraordinary ascent of J\u00f3dar comes edged with an ick factor, and it\u2019s a pity. One outburst at a ball kid* is uncool. Repeated outbursts\u2014marked by strange breaches<\/a> of sportsmanship and dubious wardrobe malfunctions<\/a>\u2014harden into a pattern.<\/p>\n \u200bJ\u00f3dar may well end up in Turin at the ATP Finals, a remarkable achievement for a player who started the year with a triple-digit ranking. When he finally shuts it down, he should take a victory lap and celebrate this breakthrough year. Then, when he pivots to assessing 2027 and areas for improvement, he might want to start with his behavior and how he treats others.<\/p>\n \u200bSome of this is just common courtesy, but it also strikes me as important for his tennis. Federer, Nadal and countless others handled the pressures and frustrations of tennis without demeaning others, especially those with less power. But they also realized that friction didn\u2019t serve their tennis. Why give fans a reason to cheer against you? Why give opponents additional motivation to beat you? Why give people\u2014including the media\u2014reasons to focus on flaws?<\/p>\n \u200bTreat people with respect. Display sportsmanship. Minimize drama. It can be as important as focusing on nutrition and conditioning. Control what you can control if you want to optimize your chances at excellence. \u200bJ\u00f3dar needs to deal with this before it impedes his success.<\/p>\n \u200b* Part of what makes this so toxically uncool is the power differential. A kid\u2014likely unpaid\u2014is tasked with fetching your equipment and towels. And you berate them? In public? That\u2019s such bad form. As the chair umpire in Shanghai masterfully put it<\/a>, \u201cYou know what you said, I\u2019m not going to repeat it; that is not how we talk to ball kids.\u201d<\/p>\n \u200bI would submit that applies to life, not just tennis.<\/p>\n Also, note the wildly disproportionate number of professional players who were once ball kids, including Federer. You\u2019re not just berating someone working in service of your success. You\u2019re not just berating a kid. You\u2019re berating someone who, likely, has a passion for this sport. And likely plays themself. And perhaps even has pro ambitions. Mistreating ball kids is akin to committing a crime against tennis.<\/p>\n \u200bAnother sidebar: J\u00f3dar and his father have held off on hiring an agent. That\u2019s their choice. Obviously, they have their reasons. But an agent would have been helpful here. Had J\u00f3dar walked off the court and been advised to issue an immediate social media apology and find the kid and douse him with swag, it would have helped with damage control.\u00a0 <\/p>\n Hi Jon, BRAVO for all points made by Mark A in the Oct. 14 mailbag<\/a>, and in particular for his plea for far more \u201ccourt level\u201d TV views. Your half-hearted endorsement was disappointing.\u00a0 I suspect that you may have spent little time viewing any of the many \u201ccourt level\u201d TV videos on YouTube, and that if you had, you too would be a zealous advocate. Certainly the exposure that court level is given on ESPN and Tennis Channel is not a meaningful sample.\u00a0 \u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n I also think you greatly underestimate your own potential influence (including, of course, the mailbag). Although you\u2019re not responsible for TC\u2019s technical coverage decisions, I’m sure that any comments you might make to the \u201cpowers that be\u201d would carry significant weight. I\u2019m also sure that requests by TC and ESPN\u2019s producers would carry immense weight with those providing them with \u201cin house or world feeds.\u201d (I may be wrong, but I even suspect that those \u201cfeeds\u201d include match-long court level and other camera views that TC, ESPN and other recipients may show as they choose.)\u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n In your comments on the new Australian Open tournament director you endorsed the need for fresh thinking in tennis. That is so true of tennis TV coverage. When compared with the innovative TV coverage of other sports, it is sadly lacking.<\/p>\n John Rossitter, Middletown CT<\/p>\n \u2022 Fair. And yes, I\u2019m basing my opinion on Tennis Channel and ESPN, not YouTube. I\u2019m open to the suggestion that I\u2019m missing something here. And I will forward this to the proverbial powers that be.<\/p>\n One of tennis\u2019s great virtues is also one of its liabilities: the lack of standardization. So much about tournament X\u2014the venue, surface, draw size, fan experience and even the trophy\u2014may bear no resemblance to the previous or following week. Some tournaments may not even be equipped with court-level cameras. I know that a lot of times both ESPN and Tennis Channel say, essentially, We take what we get from the feed. But, again, I take your suggestions seriously and will pass them on.<\/p>\n A few of you wrote in about the Served interview<\/a> with WTA Chairwoman Valerie Camillo and her repeated references to equal prize money, but her unwillingness to address the threshold is this: Can the WTA afford equal prize money?<\/p>\n \u2022 Right now, CVC, the private equity \u201cstrategic partner<\/a>\u201d\u2014insert joke here: the frog called the scorpion \u201cstrategic partner\u201d\u2014is funding the shortfall between the WTA and ATP. This is awesome for WTA players, who are getting subsidized wages. But it\u2019s brutal for the tour, which has an investor\u2014asking for three times the return on their investment\u2014taking a 20% stake in the business and contributing nothing to future growth. The short-term gain brings profound long-term pain.<\/p>\n Here\u2019s an analogy. My daughter makes $10 an hour babysitting the neighbors\u2019 kids. My son makes $6 an hour. But an \u201cangel investor\u201d covers the shortfall and gives my son an extra $4. She calls herself a \u201cstrategic partner.\u201d Gushing press releases tout parity and equal pay. Both kids are making $10 an hour for comparable work.<\/p>\n But there\u2019s a catch. The angel isn\u2019t a philanthropist. She\u2019s a ruthless businesswoman. In exchange for that $4-per-hour contribution to bring my son up to \u201cequality,\u201d she demands a 20% stake in the parents\u2019 portfolio, plus annual interest. The splashy press release and talking points still stand, but the business reality is considerably more complicated than the self-congratulatory talking points.<\/p>\n And what if my daughter sees her wages go up and makes $12 an hour next year? Well, to achieve parity, the angel investor will have to backfill even more. To achieve this short-term goal, she will demand an even bigger stake in the parents\u2019 future earnings.<\/p>\n Again, it would be one thing if the angel investor\u2014or CVC\u2014was contributing toward a student loan, marketing materials (or a decent website!) or some investment and growth. Businesses engage with private equity and venture capital all the time here, taking on aggressive deal terms for the prospect of growth. But this isn\u2019t that.<\/p>\n It\u2019s just a stopgap infusion of cash to create equality. It\u2019s robbing Peter (the WTA) to pay Paul (the players). It was a terrible deal at the time, and the effects could be catastrophic as the money comes due.<\/p>\n Hola Jon!<\/p>\n Quick comment about Elena Rybakina: Power, precision, strong mind \u2026 and quiet. I love this. No screams, no extra theatre, no \u201cCome on!!\u201d every two points or so. Bj\u00f6rn Borg\u2019s spirit of fight has been reborn in a wonderful sportswoman; I hope she wins it all. I hope she sets an example in an era of over-screaming, not only in tennis but in the everyday world. I simply love it.<\/p>\n Best regards, Carlos Acosta.<\/p>\n \u2022 Some straight talk here: If you\u2019re running a tour, have a position in the marketing department or are spreading the gospel of the WTA\/tennis\/your tournament, it\u2019s not optimal to have a player so averse to PR, not inclined to make excursions into candor, guarded with her persona and lacking in theatricality when she plays.<\/p>\n If you\u2019re not in that game\u2014if you\u2019re simply a fan of the sport and have no financial stake\u2014Rybakina is great. She\u2019s a star who plays peerless tennis while wearing this mask of poise. She doesn\u2019t waste time, energy and emotional bandwidth on drama. The Bj\u00f6rn Borg comparison isn\u2019t quite there, but it\u2019s close. She is cool. That is, she is poised and unflappable or uninterested in look-at-me drama. Good for her. Good that tennis accommodates the Sabalenkian, Ostapenkian, Townsendian extroverts and uninhibited types, and makes space for a cipher like Rybakina\u2014big tent and all.<\/p>\n HAVE A GOOD WEEK, EVERYONE!<\/p>\n
A hard-core tennis fan<\/p>\n![\"Rafael](\"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/uk\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/10\/01m5eabykwqt1ertzf2t.jpg\" "\\"Rafael")
<\/p>\n
Philadelphia<\/p>\n![\"\"](\"https:\/\/assets.minutemediacdn.com\/platform\/google_discover_icon.svg\"){kind=icon}
Add us as a preferred source on GoogleFollow<\/a>