\u2022 Good soldiering: I appeared on this week\u2019s Songversations podcast.\u00a0<\/a><\/p>\n \u2022 Comedian Aziz Ansari with an A+ tennis bit:<\/p>\n \u2022 All hail retiring Rajeev Ram!<\/a> (And not just because he is from Indiana.)<\/p>\n Onward \u2026\u00a0<\/p>\n There were a number of questions this week about Patrick McEnroe\u2019s appearance before Congress. Patrick\u2019s crusade to limit overseas players being awarded college tennis (and sports) scholarships has won him favor<\/a> with certain lawmakers.\u00a0<\/p>\n A) Let\u2019s be clear: this is not jingoism. Having athletes from overseas on college teams is a win-win. Nobody\u2014including Patrick\u2014wants an outright ban on international athletes. Foreign athletes add to a team culture and fabric and should be totally welcome. The question is one of quantity and quality. As for quality, when schools can recruit top 200 ATP players in their 20s, as Texas recently did,<\/a> it perverts competition and flies in the face of fairness. Likewise, when teams stack their entire roster with international players, in the eyes of many (myself included), it violates the spirit of college sports.\u00a0<\/p>\n B) At a time when nonrevenue sports are on the chopping block, this recruiting \u201cstrategy\u201d seems especially short-sighted. If athletic directors tasked with cutting sports must choose between programs filled with taxpayers\u2019 kids and this roster<\/a>, the choice is easy.\u00a0<\/p>\n C) I heard that zero top college coaches went to Kalamazoo this year. Why? When you can recruit top-200 ATP players, why spend time luring 16-year-old Americans? This is brutal for American tennis. What a chilling effect this could have on U.S. junior tennis.<\/p>\n D) Legal challenges aside, the obvious solution is a cap. Either a set number of scholarships per team (maybe two?) or a roster that must mirror the school\u2019s demographics. Take Lander University in South Carolina: International students make up 2% to 3% of the student body. Yet here\u2019s its tennis roster<\/a>. Can anyone honestly make a good-faith case that this aligns with the values of college athletics?\u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n E) The Intercollegiate Tennis Association has been toothless when it should be ruthless. It\u2019s disappointing that a governing body has allowed this situation to spiral without taking a meaningful stand.<\/p>\n F) College coaches want to win to protect their jobs. Fair enough. And college coaches have enough pressure with NIL and transfer rules. Fair enough. It\u2019s also unclear whether a cap would survive a legal challenge. Which is why \u2026\u00a0<\/p>\n G) I offer a proposal to address this issue. Full disclosure: I recently mentioned this to Patrick, and he can even call it the \u201cMcEnroe Pledge.\u201d Quite simply\u2014and this is similar to what Dario Amodei proposed re: AI\u2014 draft some sort of informal, unenforceable covenant: I eagerly recruit international players. They add to the culture of a team. They introduce the entire roster to different customs and parts of the world. But international players cannot be X% of the roster. Some coaches would sign. Others wouldn\u2019t. But there would be some accountability, and coaches would have to take a stand, one way or the other.\u00a0<\/p>\n Mika Brunold defeated Jo\u00e3o Lucas Reis da Silva in the Tulln Challenger final. | Roberta Corradin\/NurPhoto\/Getty Image<\/p>\n Given tennis\u2019s general love of representation ([Alexandra] Eala, [Ons] Jabeur, [Frances] Tiafoe\/[Ben] Shelton U.S. Open semi), the lack of attention for good news: [Mika Brunold]\/[Jo\u00e3o Lucas Reis da Silva] is puzzling and disappointing. Any idea why the ATP didn\u2019t clap it? The New York Times<\/a>, Yahoo and HuffPo did.<\/p>\n Megan F.<\/p>\n \u2022 A few of you asked about this. Brunold and Reis da Silva\u2019s Tulln Challenger final marked the first pro men\u2019s tennis final played between two out gay players. Giving grace: This match occurred during the same weekend as the U.S. Open final. Otherwise, I suspect it would have gotten more attention. As you note, it\u2019s historic, significant and meaningful to many that two gay men met in a tournament final and spoke openly and poignantly about the experience. The good news for the ATP: Brunhold is only 21, and there is still plenty of time for the ATP to feature this story.<\/p>\n Jon, if you are going to beat the Hall of Fame drum for [Kate\u0159ina] Siniakov\u00e1, can you please add [Daniel] Nestor to the list. His omission is glaring.<\/p>\n Rich Gannon<\/p>\n \u2022 I am going to bang the Hall of Fame drum for Siniakov\u00e1, darn it. As for Nestor, are you daring to imply that a man who won 91 doubles titles, 12 majors and Olympic gold (and once beat Stefan Edberg in singles) is worthy of entry into the same Hall of Fame that enshrined, say, Leander Paes, who won 55 titles and eight majors?<\/p>\n A) Some media outlets, including the New York Times, don\u2019t allow their staff to vote on Hall of Fame ballots. Sports Illustrated does, but I feel duty-bound to disclose my choices. (I voted for Nestor when he was on the ballot.)<\/p>\n B) Maybe we need some sort of conversion rate for doubles. No one is arguing that winning a major title in doubles comes anywhere close to a major in singles. But even if there\u2019s, say, a 10:1 ratio\u2014which, roughly, reflects the prize money breakdown\u2014Nestor gets in. Siniakov\u00e1, too.<\/p>\n C) There is a lot of disagreement, inconsistency and bad precedent regarding the Hall of Fame. But it\u2019s a real triumph that so many tennis people\u2014fans, yes, but also players\u2014have suddenly taken this intense interest.<\/p>\n Hi Jon, I was doing some reminiscing lately and remembered the incredible doubles duo of Paola Su\u00e1rez and Virginia Ruano Pascual. They were great fun to watch. With eight major titles and 44 tour titles together, do you think they should be in the Hall of Fame? Currently, in the hall we have: the Bryan brothers with 16 slams and 119 tour titles together; the Woodies with 11\/61; Leander Paes with 18\/55; and Martina Navratilova with approximately 734 bajillion. Maybe I missed some other doubles players, but it seems like the standard for the doubles hall of fame is incredibly high!<\/p>\n Cheers, \u2022 You\u2019re right to consult precedent because that\u2019s the driving force. Our pal Pam Shriver is in the Hall of Fame\u2014same for Helena Sukov\u00e1. Clearly, that induction was based on doubles, or a composite, because singles wouldn\u2019t have met the bar. Again, consider that Nestor did not get in. He won 95 (!) titles, including the career Grand Slam (eight majors total) and an Olympic gold medal. With that as the bar, Ruano Pascual and Su\u00e1rez (who I enjoyed as well and also recall as lovely, accessible players) have no chance.\u00a0<\/p>\n Jon, have we reached the point where constantly identifying the \u201cfirst Black,\u201d \u201cfirst Asian,\u201d \u201cfirst Hispanic,\u201d \u201cfirst Pacific Islander,\u201d etc. player to achieve some particular tennis milestone may actually be becoming counterproductive.\u00a0<\/p>\n When groups have historically been excluded or underrepresented, recognizing a genuine breakthrough can be meaningful and important. But when virtually every accomplishment is filtered through race or ethnicity, are we instead reinforcing the very distinctions we ultimately hope will matter less. The long-term goal is to reach a point where a player\u2019s achievement is noteworthy because of the achievement itself, rather than because of the player\u2019s racial or ethnic classification. Continually sorting athletes into racial and ethnic categories can begin to feel less like celebrating diversity and more like emphasizing separation,\u00a0<\/p>\n Fernand<\/p>\n \u2022 Last month I noted that if Learner Tien and Brandon Nakashima had met in the Canada final, it would have marked the first all-Asian-American Masters 1000 final. Reading the comments<\/a> (always a mistake), I got blasted for wokeness, for not acknowledging two blue-eyed finalists, etc.\u00a0<\/p>\n A) These firsts may not be resonant for you, but they might be meaningful for others. Why deprive them of that pride or acknowledgment?\u00a0<\/p>\n B) Certain groups represent distinct communities or distinct minorities (or historically mistreated groups) in a way that \u201cblue-eyed\u201d does not.\u00a0<\/p>\n I am open to the reality that this isn\u2019t an uncommon belief. Karen Crouse made a similar point<\/a> in her column while taking a swipe at ESPN\u2019s coverage of the Shelton-Tiafoe U.S. Open semifinal.<\/p>\n Two Black players in a Masters 1000 final? Two openly gay men\u2019s players in a final? Two Czech women in a Wimbledon final? Those are significant achievements. They speak well of tennis. And I don\u2019t quite get why your instinct would be to deprive a subset of fans of the chance to take pride in celebrating that.<\/p>\n Hi Jon,<\/p>\n After the Russian invasion of Ukraine, Russian players were banned from Wimbledon in 2022 and even now there is a blank space beside their names where other players\u2019 flags are shown. (Like any sane person who cares about human rights and democracy, I support Ukraine 100%.)<\/p>\n In 2026, the United States has kidnapped the leader of a country (granted, a very bad and corrupt dude) and installed a puppet regime to gain access to that country\u2019s oil (Venezuela); created a humanitarian crisis in another country with a cruel embargo (Cuba); and attacked a third country, murdering its leader (again, a very bad dude) and dropping a missile on a school and murdering 120 children (Iran). If the world were fair and just, wouldn\u2019t American players get the same treatment as their Russian counterparts?<\/p>\n Charles Kroeker, Winnipeg, Canada<\/p>\n \u2022 I would caution against false equivalencies. An unprovoked attack against your sovereign neighbor\u2014provoking a war that caused more than a million casualties<\/a>\u2014is not quite the same as a surgical strike to remove a corrupt foreign leader. But your point is well taken. It\u2019s easy to head down the slippery slope. Russia is not the only pariah nation. Like you, I have strong feelings about Ukraine and Vladimir Putin, but I\u2019m not sure that withholding the flag when Daniil Medvedev plays is the most effective form of resistance and dissent.<\/p>\n Jon,\u00a0<\/p>\n Disappointed to see the [Alexander] Zverev allegations take center stage in the mailbag. These cases were settled <\/a>some time ago with the agreement of the court and accusers.<\/p>\n The reason for the prices dropping for the U.S. Open semi is neither Zverev nor Karen [Khachanov] are a gate draw and likely never will be. I would note my co-workers and friends that attended the U.S. Open via free corporate seats have little to no idea who either player is. I watched Novak [Djokovic] practice with Zverev two years back and when leaving, not a single person asked Zverev for an autograph.<\/p>\n I also recall you defending [Justin] Gimelstob to the end when facing similar allegations\u2026<\/p>\n Regards, George<\/p>\n \u2022 First, I went back and looked at what I wrote about Justin Gimelstob<\/a> (who was accused of assault, not multiple allegations of domestic abuse\u2014a critical difference) in 2019. You can judge for yourself whether I am being consistent or inconsistent.<\/p>\n My overarching point about Zverev is that if you believe in due process and basic presumptions, you cannot lobby for a ban or suggest he shouldn\u2019t be allowed to compete. He may not be \u201cinnocent,\u201d as he contends, but no guilty resolution is on the books.\u00a0<\/p>\n But due process does not pertain to perception. Zverev himself doesn\u2019t seem to grasp that the absence of a guilty determination doesn\u2019t foreclose opinions (or questions) about his circumstances. It\u2019s also naive to suggest there is no problem. Ignore the social media chatter if you want, but when tickets to his semifinal matches drop to less than the price of a movie, the market has spoken, and tennis has an issue to confront.<\/p>\n Hi Jon, I know you\u2019ll probably be recovering from the U.S. Open. I don\u2019t know if you have access to the Australian newspaper for the original article, it\u2019s paywalled, but here is a Yahoo Sports <\/a>\u00a0reference to John Newcombe\u2019s comments for your benefit.<\/p>\n Russell,\u00a0 Melbourne.<\/p>\n \u2022 Further proof that hosting a major and slurping from that revenue trough doesn\u2019t guarantee success in minting players.<\/p>\n HAVE A GOOD WEEK, EVERYONE!<\/p>\n![\"Mika](\"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/09\/01m37jhyaxpzfhaj4743.jpg\" "\\"Mika")
<\/p>\n
Mike R
Corvallis, OR<\/p>\n
![\"\"](\"https:\/\/assets.minutemediacdn.com\/platform\/google_discover_icon.svg\"){kind=icon}
Add us as a preferred source on Google