Jabeur, Ons

Subterms

    More stories

    • 150 Shares199 Views

      in Tennis

      Elina Svitolina Aims for a Wimbledon Singles Final Against Jabeur or Sabalenka

      by

      Svitolina, the Ukrainian player who has captivated Wimbledon fans, beat No. 1 Iga Swiatek and will play Marketa Vondrousova in a semifinal match Thursday.Ons Jabeur still cannot bring herself to watch last year’s Wimbledon final. Her loss to Elena Rybakina on Centre Court is still too raw, too depressing to offset any tactical value that Jabeur might squeeze out of relieving it all over again.But, she said with a smile, “I can watch today’s match.”Indeed, that will make great binge viewing for Jabeur, who was able to exact a measure of revenge from the third-seeded Rybakina, 6-7 (5), 6-4, 6-1, in a quarterfinal on Centre Court Wednesday.She received no trophy for it, but it set up another Wimbledon rematch — this one against No. 2 Aryna Sabalenka, who beat Jabeur in the quarterfinal stage two years ago in straight sets. But much has changed since then, for both women.On the other side of the draw, Elina Svitolina, a wild-card entrant, will play the unseeded, but highly talented, Marketa Vondrousova for the other chance at the final.Svitolina and Jabeur are the clear audience favorites at Wimbledon. Jabeur, who is from Tunisia, is adored for her warm, engaging personality and for her trailblazing efforts as the first woman from Africa and the first from an Arabic-speaking country to reach a Grand Slam tournament final. She also reached the U.S. Open final later last summer.Svitolina, who beat No. 1 Iga Swiatek in their quarterfinal on Tuesday, has captivated fans around the world for her unflagging efforts to support and play on behalf of her native Ukraine. She also had a baby in October. Even Svitolina’s opponents cannot suppress their admiration for the outspoken Svitolina, who only returned to the tour in April, but has slashed her way through the draw to reach the final four.“She’s a superwoman,” Vondrousova said.Jabeur and Sabalenka together represent the power side of the draw, where, by chance, most of the better grass court players were assembled after the drawing. Rybakina, last year’s champion, said she thought the winner of Thursday’s duel between Sabalenka and Jabeur would eventually take home the trophy, and many would agree. Jabeur, in a moment of candid self-confidence, revealed she was one of them.Aryna Sabalenka defeated Madison Keys in a quarterfinal on Wednesday.Glyn Kirk/Agence France-Presse — Getty Images“I do believe our part is stronger than the other part,” Jabeur said. “But every Grand Slam final is a final, and you can change a lot of things.”It was hardly an affront to Svitolina and Vondrousova, but sometimes players seize upon the most innocuous slights to fuel an angry motivation. Jo Durie, the British former player and now a coach and broadcaster, said that in 1983, at the peak of Martina Navratilova’s power, she had once dared to declare publicly that she had a chance to beat the great champion.Durie made the comment when their Australian Open quarterfinal had been suspended by rain at one set apiece.“Martina was livid,” Durie recalled on Wednesday. “The next day she said to the press, ‘How dare Jo-Jo say that?’ We all have an ego in this sport, and we all have to use it at some point.”Durie said her words had been slightly distorted in news reports the following day. But sometimes the smallest things can be used to seek an advantage, and by Saturday’s final, Svitolina or Vondrousova may seek to uphold the honor of her side of the draw, should she play Jabeur.As popular as Svitolina has become, Durie warned that Vondrousova, the least known player still alive in the draw, could not be overlooked.After Vondrousova became a French Open finalist in 2019, her career was subsequently affected by injuries. But as a well-rounded left-handed player, she can befuddle opponents with her serve and a variety of shots, from soft and dicey to overpowering.“Wow, is she talented,” Durie said.Could this then be the stage where Svitolina’s captivating run comes to an end? Or, if she wins, will she end up facing Sabalenka, a powerful Belarusian player whose nationality makes her an enemy of sorts to Svitolina?Since Russia invaded Ukraine in 2022 with Belarus’s logistical support, Svitolina has helped raise money for relief efforts in Ukraine and has declared that every match she plays is on behalf of her country. She has also said she will not shake hands with any players from Russia or Belarus, even if she likes them personally.Elina Svitolina reached a semifinal by upsetting No. 1 Iga Swiatek.Sebastien Bozon/Agence France-Presse — Getty ImagesThe matter surfaced in the fourth round when Svitolina defeated Victoria Azarenka, who is from Belarus. Azarenka and Svitolina are compatible personally, and Azarenka spoke out against the invasion when it began. Even though there was no handshake after that match, Azarenka gave Svitolina a thumbs-up salute. But fans booed Azarenka off the court — and it stunned her. Some seemingly booed because they misunderstood, blaming Azarenka for the snub. Others perhaps did so because of Azarenka’s nationality.“I think people also need to know what’s going on and why there is no handshake between Ukrainians, Russian and Belarusian players,” Sabalenka said after she had beaten Madison Keys, 6-2, 6-4, on Wednesday. “I really hope that nobody else will face this reaction from the crowd.”More pressing, of course, is her meeting with Jabeur in their power semifinal. Sabalenka understands that Jabeur, while known for her slices, her drop shots and her off-speed game, can also unload from the baseline when necessary. Sabalenka called Jabeur’s game “tricky” and noted that her opponent’s goal, to become the first Arab and African woman to win a Grand Slam event, was providing her with enhanced motivation.But Jabeur has other forces driving her, too, similar to what spurred her on Wednesday against Rybakina. Jabeur did not watch their encounter from last year, but walking onto the court felt eerily similar. So to shake things up, she took the chair on the other side from the one she had sat in last year.In a similar way, she is now out to erase her quarterfinal loss to Sabalenka here in 2021.“I’m going to prepare and take my revenge from two years ago,” Jabeur said, again with a smile. More

    • 163 Shares99 Views

      in Tennis

      At Wimbledon, Is It Time for Hawk-Eye Live to Replace the Line Judges?

      by

      Line judges made incorrect calls in the first week that changed the trajectory of matches for Andy Murray, Bianca Andreescu and Venus Williams, among others. Is it time to give computers the job?Andy Murray was a victim.Bianca Andreescu was too.Jiri Lehecka had to play a fifth set and essentially win his third-round match twice.Hawk-Eye Live, an electronic line calling system, could have saved the players their set, even their match, but Wimbledon doesn’t use it to its full extent, preferring a more traditional approach. The rest of the year on the professional tours, many tournaments rely exclusively on the technology, allowing players to know with near certainty whether their ball lands in or out because the computer always makes the call.But when players come to the All England Club for what is widely regarded as the most important tournament of the year, their fates are largely determined by line judges relying on their eyesight. Even more frustrating, because Wimbledon and its television partners have access to the technology, which players can use to challenge a limited number of calls each match, everyone watching the broadcast sees in real time if a ball is in or out. The people for whom the information is most important — the players and the chair umpire, who oversees the match — must rely on the line judge.When the human eye is judging serves traveling around 120 m.p.h. and forehand rallies faster than 80 m.p.h., errors are bound to happen.“When mistakes are getting made in important moments, then obviously as a player you don’t want that,” said Murray, who could have won his second-round match against Stefanos Tsitsipas in the fourth set, if computers had been making the line calls. Murray’s backhand return was called out, even though replays showed the ball was in. He ended up losing in five sets.No tennis tournament clings to its traditions the way Wimbledon does. Grass court tennis. Matches on Centre Court beginning later than everywhere else, and after those in the Royal Box have had their lunch. No lights for outdoor tennis. A queue with an hourslong wait for last-minute tickets.Those traditions do not have an effect on the outcome of matches from one point to the next. But keeping line judges on the court, after technology has proved to be more reliable, has been affecting — perhaps even turning — key matches seemingly every other day.To understand why that is happening, it’s important to understand how tennis has ended up with different rules for judging across its tournaments.Before the early 2000s, tennis — like baseball, basketball, hockey and other sports — relied on human officials to make calls, many of which were wrong, according to John McEnroe (and pretty much every other tennis player). McEnroe’s most infamous meltdown happened at Wimbledon in 1981, prompted by an incorrect line call.“I would have loved to have had Hawk-Eye,” said Mats Wilander, the seven-time Grand Slam singles champion and a star in the 1980s.But then tennis began experimenting with the Hawk-Eye Live judging system. Cameras capture the bounce of every ball from multiple angles and computers analyze the images to depict the ball’s trajectory and impact points with only a microscopic margin for error. Line judges remained as a backup, but players received three opportunities each set to challenge a line call, and an extra challenge when a set went to a tiebreaker.That forced players to try to figure out when to risk using a challenge they might need on a more crucial point later in the set.“It’s too much,” Wilander said. “I can’t imagine making that calculation, standing there, thinking about whether a shot felt good, how many challenges I have left, how late is it in the set.”Even Roger Federer, who was good at nearly every aspect of tennis, was famously terrible at making successful challenges.Hawk-Eye Live cameras along the outer courts at the U.S. Open in 2020.Jason Szenes/EPA, via ShutterstockBefore long, tennis officials began considering a fully electronic line calling system. When the Covid-19 pandemic hit, tournaments were looking for ways to limit the number of people on the tennis court.Craig Tiley, the chief executive of Tennis Australia, said adopting electronic calling in 2021 was also a part of the Australian Open’s “culture of innovation.” Players liked it. So did fans, Tiley said, because matches moved more quickly.Last year, the U.S. Open switched to fully electronic line calling. There is an ongoing debate about whether the raised lines on clay courts would prevent the technology from providing the same precision as on grass and hardcourts. At the French Open and other clay court tournaments, the ball leaves a mark that umpires often inspect.In 2022, the men’s ATP Tour featured 21 tournaments with fully electronic line calling, including stops in Indian Wells, Calif.; Miami Gardens, Fla.; Canada; and Washington, D.C. All of those sites have women’s WTA tournaments as well. Every ATP tournament will use it beginning in 2025.“The question is not whether it’s 100 percent right but whether it is better than a human, and it is definitely better than a human,” said Mark Ein, who owns the Citi Open in Washington, D.C.A spokesman for the All England Club said Sunday that Wimbledon has no plans to remove its line judges.“After the tournament we look at everything we do, but at this moment, we have no plans to change the system,” Dominic Foster said.Line judges at Wimbledon are responsible for ruling the ball in or out.Julian Finney/Getty ImagesOn Saturday, Andreescu became a casualty of human error. The 2019 U.S. Open champion from Canada, Andreescu has been going deeper into Grand Slam tournaments after years of injuries.With the finish of her match against Ons Jabeur of Tunisia in sight, Andreescu resisted asking for electronic intervention on a crucial shot the line judge had called out. From across the net Jabeur, who had been close to the ball as it landed, advised Andreescu not to waste one of her three challenges for the set, saying the ball was indeed out. The match continued, though not before television viewers saw the computerized replay that showed the ball landing on the line.“I trust Ons,” Andreescu said after Jabeur came back to beat her in three sets, 3-6, 6-3, 6-4.Andreescu explained that she was thinking of her previous match, a three-set marathon decided by a final-set tiebreaker, during which she said she “wasted” several challenges.Against Jabeur, she thought, “I’m going to save it, just in case.”Bad idea. Jabeur won that game, and the set, and then the match.Over on Court No. 12, the challenge system was causing another kind of confusion. Lehecka had match point against Tommy Paul when he raised his hand to challenge a call after returning a shot from Paul that had landed on the line. His request for a challenge came just as Paul hit the next shot into the net.The point was replayed. Paul won it, and then the set moments later, forcing a deciding set. Lehecka won, but had to run around for another half-hour. Venus Williams lost match point in her first-round match on another complicated sequence involving a challenge.Leylah Fernandez, a two-time Grand Slam finalist from Canada, said she likes the tradition of line judges at Wimbledon as the world cedes more to technology.Then again, she added, if “it did cost me a match, it would have been probably a different answer.”Andy Murray learned after his loss to Stefanos Tsitsipas that his shot, called out by a line judge, was in and could have changed the outcome of the match.Sebastien Bozon/Agence France-Presse — Getty ImagesThat is where Murray, the two-time Wimbledon champion, found himself after his loss Friday afternoon. By the time he arrived at his news conference, he had learned that his slow and sharply angled backhand return of serve that landed just a few yards from the umpire had nicked the line.The point would have given him two chances to break Tsitsipas’s serve and serve out the match. When he was told the shot was in, his eyes opened with a startle, then fell toward the floor.Murray now knew what everyone else had seen.The ball had landed under the nose of the umpire, who confirmed the call, Murray said. He could not imagine how anyone could have missed it. He actually likes having the line judges, he added. Perhaps it was his fault for not using a challenge.“Ultimately,” he said, “the umpire made a poor call that’s right in front of her.” More

    • 100 Shares179 Views

      in Tennis

      At Wimbledon, Everyone’s Chasing Swiatek, Sabalenka and Rybakina

      by

      Expect the three top-ranked women to dominate the tournament. But at least one, the defending champion Elena Rybakina, says she isn’t taking any opponent for granted.LONDON — Elena Rybakina was nervous. She was embroiled in her first match on Wimbledon’s Centre Court as defending champion. She was facing a tough opponent in Shelby Rogers. The roof was closed and she was recovering from a virus.Even more daunting, one of the greatest players ever to walk that court, Roger Federer, was now sitting just a few feet behind her, in the royal box, watching her struggle.“Yeah, maybe that’s why I was nervous,” Rybakina said after she recovered to beat Rogers on Tuesday, 4-6, 6-1, 6-2.Federer, now retired, was back at Wimbledon for a visit. As a player, he was a member of the so-called Big Three of men’s tennis, along with Rafael Nadal and Novak Djokovic. As a spectator, he was watching a player whom some experts, including Chris Evert, believe is part of an emerging big three of women’s tennis.Rybakina, the third-ranked player in the world, along with No. 1 Iga Swiatek and No. 2 Aryna Sabalenka, comprise the top of the women’s tennis pyramid. Together, they have won the last five major tournaments, and the eventual winner of this year’s Wimbledon is expected — but obviously not guaranteed — to come from their elite group, as well.Those who think it is premature to crown a triumvirate of women’s tennis will find the 24-year-old Rybakina in agreement.“I think it’s too early to say anything about just three players because it’s not like it was Roger or Djokovic,” Rybakina said. “It’s still too far.”All three players are under 26, and all have the necessary tools to win multiple tournaments and remain at the top of the rankings. Left out of the grouping are players like Jessica Pegula, ranked No. 4. But Pegula said she agrees that the top three are the class of the women’s game and deserve the recognition, even if she would like to expand the number to four someday.“I think it’s exciting to have something for us to talk about and for fans to get involved in and hopefully be excited to watch them battle it out,” Pegula said on Saturday. She beat Lauren Davis in the first round on Monday. “But I hope I’m part of that conversation at some point. I guess that’s all I have to say.”Ons Jabeur looked to repeat as a Wimbledon finalist again this year, but with a different outcome.Andrew Couldridge/ReutersOns Jabeur, who lost to Rybakina in last year’s Wimbledon final and to Swiatek in the U.S. Open final, is a solid grass court player, who could also stake a claim to this year’s Wimbledon title. Jabeur is another who believes that Swiatek, Sabalenka and Rybakina have set themselves apart.“For me it’s inspiring to see them doing great,” Jabeur said. “You can learn a lot from them.”Coco Gauff, who is only 19 and ranked No. 7, could also intrude into the mix one day. But not yet, not after she lost to Sofia Kenin, a former No. 4 player who is 24, in the first round on Monday.As Rybakina said on Tuesday, “anyone can still beat anyone.”As Wimbledon opened under rainy skies, each one of the three top players had at least one question to answer on court before she could lift the trophy. Swiatek, 22 and from Poland, has struggled on grass and never made it past the fourth round in her three attempts here.She demonstrated good form at Bad Homburg, a grass-court tournament before Wimbledon, but became ill and had to withdraw after winning a quarterfinal match. She looked fully recovered in her first-round win over Lin Zhu on Monday and a title here would give her three of the last four majors.Rybakina won Wimbledon last year with an amazing run of confidence and form, defeating Jabeur in three sets for her first Grand Slam title. But her conditioning remains in doubt. A virus forced her withdrawal from the French Open last month, and she said the condition worsened afterward. She is OK now, she said, but she had to lighten her workouts leading up to Wimbledon.Sabalenka did not even play at Wimbledon last year. She is from Minsk, in Belarus, and the tournament banned all players from Russia and Belarus from competing because of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine and Belarus’s cooperation with that military incursion.The amiable Sabalenka opened her news conference on Saturday, before the tournament started, by saying she would not answer questions about politics because she had already done so several times. (Rybakina was born in Moscow but plays for Kazakhstan).Aryna Sabalenka hit a between-the-legs shot with her back to the net against Panna Udvardy.Adrian Dennis/Agence France-Presse — Getty ImagesSabalenka said she could barely even watch the tournament last year during her impromptu staycation.“I didn’t watch Wimbledon a lot,” she said. “I felt so bad, and I just couldn’t watch it. Every time if Wimbledon would be on TV, I would cry.”Hence, she has played only eight matches on grass the last two years, including only two this year leading up to Wimbledon, and has gone 5-3. Perhaps more concerning than the surface was her devastating loss at the French Open last month. Serving for the semifinal match at 5-2, she allowed Karolina Muchova to come back and win.Sabalenka, 25, who won her first major tournament at this year’s Australian Open, was asked this week about her level of confidence on grass, and said, “I don’t like to speak about confidence.”She continued, “For me it’s a little weird. I just want to say that I have strong belief that I can do well on grass. I already did it. I feel good on grass.”She certainly played well on it in her first-round victory on Tuesday. Federer left after Andy Murray won and missed seeing Sabalenka hit a masterful between-the-legs shot from the baseline, with her back to the net. Her opponent, Panna Udvardy of Hungary, was ready at the net to volley it away for the point. Sabalenka smiled and raised her fist to salute the artistic rally, on her way to a straight sets victory, 6-3, 6-2.“I missed this place a lot,” she said on court afterward, “that’s why I played my best tennis today.” More

    • 188 Shares99 Views

      in Tennis

      The Same Work but a Lot Less Pay for Women. Welcome to Tennis in 2023.

      by

      At the Italian Open, women will compete for less than half as much money as the men. Organizers say they intend to fix that, but not for two years.The best tennis players in the world descend this week on Rome, where men and women will play in the same best-of-three-sets format, on the same courts and in the same tournament, which sells one same-price ticket for both men’s matches and women’s matches.There is one massive difference between the two competitions, however: Men will compete for $8.5 million while the women will compete for $3.9 million.The huge pay discrepancy comes after two months of tennis that included three similarly significant tournaments in California, Florida and Madrid that featured men and women competing for the same amount of prize money. Men and women also get paid the same at the four Grand Slam tournaments, where men play best-of-five sets and the women play best of three.But not in Rome at the Italian Open. And not yet in the Cincinnati suburbs at the Western & Southern Open. Or in Canada, at the National Bank Open, where the men and women alternate between Toronto and Montreal each year.Angelo Binaghi, the chief executive of Italy’s tennis federation, announced recently that the Italian Open was committed to achieving pay equity by 2025 “to align itself with other major events on the circuit,” even though an expanded format will bring in additional money this year. For the next two editions of the tournament, women will have to do the same work for a lot less pay, which makes them feel, well, not great.“I don’t know why it’s not equal right now,” said Paula Badosa, a 25-year-old from Spain who is among the leaders of a nascent player organization, the Professional Tennis Players Association. “They don’t inform us. They say this is what you get and you have to play.”A spokesman for the Italian federation did not make Binaghi available for an interview.“It’s really frustrating,” Ons Jabeur, who made two Grand Slam finals last year and is seeded fourth in Rome, said during an interview Tuesday. “It’s time for change. It’s time for the tournament to do better.”Steve Simon, the chairman and chief executive of the WTA Tour, which organizes the women’s circuit on behalf of the tournament owners and players, said the disparate prize money was a reflection of a market that values men’s sports more highly than women’s, especially for sponsorships and media rights. He said the organization was working toward a solution that would strive to achieve pay equity at all of tennis’ biggest events in the coming years.“There is still a long way to go but we are seeing progress,” Simon said in an interview Monday.The explanations — and blame — for women in tennis continuing to be so shortchanged include ingrained chauvinism, bad agreements with tournament owners and the eat-what-you-kill nature of the sports business, where owners, officials and organizers often blame the athletes (rather than their incompetence) for not generating enough revenue. Then they use it as an excuse not to invest in the sport and keep athlete pay and prize money low.In tennis, women often receive second billing in mixed tournaments — less-desirable schedules on smaller courts, sometimes even lesser hotels. In Madrid last week, the participants in the women’s doubles final did not get a chance to speak during the awards ceremony. The men did.Organizers often tell the women they lack the star power of the men. At the French Open last year, Amélie Mauresmo, the tournament director and a former world No. 1 in singles, scheduled just one women’s match in the featured nighttime slot, compared to nine men’s matches, then explained that the men’s game had “more attraction” and appeal than the women’s game. She later apologized, but when second-billing can make it harder for women to achieve stardom, this self-fulfilling prophecy can lead to lower pay.In March, Denis Shapovalov of Canada, currently ranked 27th, published an essay in The Players’ Tribune criticizing the sport’s leaders for not being more unified.“I think some people might think of gender equality as mere political correctness,” wrote Shapovalov, whose mother has coached him and whose girlfriend, Mirjam Bjorklund of Sweden, plays on the women’s tour. “Deep down they don’t feel that women deserve as much.”The WTA has committed some unforced errors. At the most important mixed tournaments, attendance is mandatory for women and men. The WTA only requires participation at tournaments in Indian Wells, Calif.; Miami Gardens, Fla.; Madrid and Beijing, but not in Rome, Canada or Ohio, even though those events rank just behind the Grand Slams in importance. Also, the WTA awards slightly fewer ranking points than the men’s tour does in Rome, Canada and Ohio, where the women’s champion receives 900 points compared with 1,000 for the men.These minor differences have given tournament officials an excuse for paying women so much less, even though nearly all of the top women play the big optional events, unless they are injured. Organizers, however, say that without mandatory participation they can’t market the tournament as effectively, so local sponsors and media companies will not pay as much.“It’s time for change. It’s time for the tournament to do better,” said Ons Jabeur, who is seeded fourth in Rome.Marijan Murat/DPA, via Associated PressMarc-Antoine Farly, a spokesman for Tennis Canada, cited that difference when asked recently why the National Bank Open offered men $5.9 million last year, compared with $2.53 million for the women. Despite that difference, Farly said, “Gender equity is very important for our organization.” He pointed to Tennis Canada’s recently released plan to seek gender equity at all levels during the next five years and to offer equal prize money at the National Bank Open by 2027. “Over the next few years, Tennis Canada fully intends to be a leading voice with the WTA on a development plan to close the WTA/ATP prize money gap.”Like most aspects of the tennis business, the formula for prize money requires a somewhat complicated explanation. Tournament owners guarantee a portion of revenues from tickets, domestic media rights and sponsorship sales for prize money. The tours contribute a portion using money from their own media rights and sponsorship deals as well as the fees the tournament owners pay the tours to acquire the licenses for the events. Simon said the WTA brings in substantially less money than the men’s circuit, the ATP Tour, which means it has substantially less money to contribute to prize money.That said, if equal prize money is important to tournament owners, they can choose to pay it. That is what the BNP Paribas Open at Indian Wells, owned by the computer technology billionaire Larry Ellison, has agreed to do for more than a decade under his contract with the WTA.“The tournament views the event as a single product,” said Matt Van Tuinen, a spokesman for the tournament. “Paying them equally is the right thing to do.”Same goes for IMG, the sports and entertainment conglomerate that owns both the Miami Open and the Madrid Open. Both pay equally.In addition to Italy’s and Canada’s tennis federations, the United States Tennis Association, which has long bragged about its leadership in pay equity, did not award equal prize money at the Western & Southern Open, the main tuneup for the U.S. Open. Last year, men competed in Mason, Ohio, for $6.28 million. Women competed for $2.53 million. The U.S. Open became the first of the Grand Slam tournaments to offer equal prize money, in 1973, and will celebrate the 50th anniversary of the event in grand fashion this summer. The U.S.T.A. ran the Cincinnati-area tournament for more than a decade.Chris Widmaier, a spokesman for the organization, said the prize money was “dictated by the commensurate level of the competition as determined by each Tour.”In other words, since the Western & Southern was not a mandatory WTA event and the women competed for 10 percent less rankings points, paying them roughly 40 cents for each dollar the men received was justified.The U.S.T.A. last summer announced it was selling the tournament to Ben Navarro, the South Carolina financier and tennis enthusiast. Through a spokesman, he declined to be interviewed for this article.Help may be on the way.Earlier this year, CVC Capital Partners, the private equity firm, bought 20 percent of a WTA commercial subsidiary for $150 million. The investment, which will be used to enhance sales and marketing efforts, combined with a strategic plan being finalized that would eliminate the discrepancies between the men’s and women’s competitions at the mixed events, is supposed to help the WTA grow its revenues. That will allow the tour to contribute more to prize money and hopefully get tournament organizers to commit to pay equity in the coming years.The plan requires some patience, which is running thin among the players.“I don’t see why we have to wait,” Jabeur said. More

    • 100 Shares169 Views

      in Tennis

      Inside the Battle to Control, and Fix, Tennis

      by

      The sport’s hit Netflix series and rising collection of young stars has investors bullish on tennis, which is poised for a once-in-a-generation moment of disruption.Walking the grounds of Melbourne Park, where the Australian Open is in full swing, one could easily believe that all is well and peaceful in professional tennis.Stadiums are packed. Champagne flows. Players are competing for more than $53 million in prize money at a major tournament the Swiss star Roger Federer nicknamed “the happy Slam.”Behind the scenes though, over the past 18 months a coterie of billionaires, deep-pocketed companies and star players has engaged in a high-stakes battle to lead what they view as a once-in-a-generation opportunity for disruption in a sport long known for its dysfunctional management and disparate power structure.The figures include Bill Ackman, the billionaire hedge fund manager and hard-core tennis hobbyist who built a tennis court atop his office tower in Midtown Manhattan. Ackman is funding a fledgling players’ organization led by the Serbian star Novak Djokovic. The group is searching for ways to grow the sport’s financial pie and the size of the players’ slice. In their ideal world, one day there might even be a major player-run event akin to a fifth Grand Slam tournament.Earlier this month, the group announced its core tenets, which include protecting player rights, securing fair compensation and improving work conditions. Players have about had it with matches that start close to midnight, end near dawn and put them at risk of injury, like Andy Murray’s second-round win in Melbourne that ended after 4 a.m. Friday. The group also announced its first eight-player executive committee, which includes some of the top young men and women in the game.There is also CVC Capital Partners, the Luxembourg-based private equity firm that has been working for months to close a $150 million equity investment in the WTA Tour that it views as a first step to becoming a prime player in tennis.Then there is Sinclair Broadcast Group, the American media conglomerate that owns the Tennis Channel, which wants to expand globally and has been trying to entice the people who run tennis to embrace that effort.All of them see tennis as uniquely positioned for growth, as a new generation of stars tries to take up the mantle of the last one, a story Netflix highlights in the new documentary series “Break Point.”“This is definitely the time to go long on tennis, 100 percent,” said Ackman, the noted short-seller best known for betting on a plunging real estate market ahead of the Great Recession. “You look at the global popularity of the sport and revenues and it is totally anomalous.”Through his philanthropic fund, the investor Bill Ackman is essentially bankrolling Novak Djokovic’s Professional Tennis Players Association, a new players’ union, and a player-controlled, for-profit entity.Elsa/Getty ImagesAckman has largely given up his noisy activist approach to investing, but tennis, he and others point out, is one of the few global sports and the only one in which men and women regularly share a tournament. That has helped it attract roughly one billion fans worldwide, with nearly equal numbers of male and female devotees.The 2023 Australian OpenThe year’s first Grand Slam event runs from Jan. 16 to Jan. 29 in Melbourne.No Spotlight, No Problem: In tennis, there is a long history of success and exposure crushing champions or sucking the joy out of them. In this Australian Open, players under the radar have gone far.Victoria Azarenka’s ‘Little Steps’: The Belarusian player took a more process-oriented approach than in the past. The outcomes were strong.Behind the Scenes: A coterie of billionaires, deep-pocketed companies and star players has engaged for months in a high-stakes battle to lead what they view as a once-in-a-generation opportunity to disrupt the sport.Endless Games: As matches stretch into the early-morning hours, players have grown concerned for their health and performance.Tennis executives estimate the sport collects roughly $2.5 billion in total revenues each year. However, it collects far less revenue per fan than other sports. The N.F.L. has a fraction of the number of fans but some $18 billion in revenues. Tennis players also receive a much smaller percentage of those revenues than athletes in other sports receive, and they have to pay for their coaches, training and much of their travel. Aside from a handful of premium events like Grand Slams and some of the Masters 1000 competitions, many tennis tournaments still have the feel of mid-tier minor league baseball.The cash crunch has been especially acute for the WTA Tour ever since it suspended its operations in China in December 2021, retaliating against a government that had seemingly silenced a Chinese player after she accused a former top government official of sexually assaulting her. The move, led by the tour chief executive Steve Simon, represented a rare moment when a major organization prioritized morals and human rights over the bottom line.China, the host country for nine tournaments, including the annual season-ending WTA Finals, had committed hundreds of millions of dollars to women’s tennis for a decade. The WTA has been hunting for new cash ever since the suspension, and with good reason. Some weeks, the disparity with the men’s tour is startling — in Auckland, New Zealand, this month, men competed for more than $700,000 in prize money while the women’s purse was $260,000.The jockeying for power has played out against the backdrop of significant infighting within men’s professional golf prompted by the debut of LIV Golf, the Saudi-backed effort to create a rival to the PGA Tour that has fractured the sport and caused some of its biggest stars to disappear from all events but the four major tournaments.The established cast of power players who run tennis — including Simon, his counterparts on the men’s pro tour, the four Grand Slams and the International Tennis Federation — have watched that unfold and worked to secure their primacy, even as they acknowledge that tennis has to change with the times.“The status quo is not an option,” said Stacey Allaster, the tournament director of the U.S. Open.Allaster, who has previously run everything from second-tier tournaments to the WTA Tour, described tennis as an “insular” sport that does not focus enough on what its fans want. “What is the road map for trial and experimenting?” Allaster asked.From left, Iga Swiatek, Stacey Allaster and Ons Jabeur after Swiatek beat Jabeur in the 2022 U.S. Open final. Allaster, the tournament’s director, said tennis has not focused enough on what fans want.Elsa/Getty ImagesAndrea Gaudenzi, the former player who is the chairman of the men’s tour, the ATP, said all the interest from private investors signaled that the sport was headed in the right direction.At a private players meeting last week in Melbourne, Gaudenzi heralded the ATP’s move to raise prize money by 21 percent, to a record $217.9 million this year. Unfortunately for the players, the ATP represents only about a quarter of the sport’s revenues. The Grand Slams collect most of the rest of the sport’s revenues, with the players’ cut at those events generally far less.Gaudenzi said his organization has had its own discussions with CVC executives but no deals are imminent.“Sometimes you need a catalyst event and someone helping you, and guiding you,” he said.That fallout from that catalyst event — the WTA’s withdrawal from China — is ongoing.The government of China’s leader, Xi Jinping, has given no indication that it will pursue a credible and transparent inquiry into the allegations from the player, Peng Shuai, which were made in November 2021 on her Chinese social media account. In November 2022, Simon called the pending deal with CVC “a very complex business decision and business move we need to work through.”CVC, which wanted to close the deal by the end of last year, has said little publicly about it. People familiar with the deal who were not authorized to discuss confidential financial information said it includes a $150 million payment for a 20 percent ownership stake in the WTA Tour.As CVC and the WTA closed in on the deal during the fall, executives with Sinclair, which acquired the Tennis Channel in 2016, expressed their growing concern that after building an international network and being one of the highest-paying partners in the sport, CVC might try to elbow out the company if it reaches a similar agreement with the ATP, some of the people said.In the short term, the women’s tour is expected to use a significant portion of the money from CVC to increase prize money for players, ensuring that men and women receive equal prize money at all the tour events they play together. That, however, will do little to produce a return for CVC, which is in this to make money.To do that during the next decade, people familiar with CVC’s thinking said, company executives want to increase collaboration with the men’s tour and hold more combined events. Then they could consolidate assets, such as media rights and sponsorships, and sell them together in hopes a combined product would fetch a significantly higher price than what each tour collects separately. That could help CVC gain a foothold within the ATP and flex its muscle.Those plans jibe with some of Gaudenzi’s priorities for the ATP, which include holding as many as nine combined events with the women’s tour, because those are the most popular with fans, creating with the Grand slams close to 200 days of the most desirable competition. The executive committee for the Professional Tennis Players Association includes Djokovic, Jabeur, the rising Spanish player Paula Badosa and Hubert Hurkacz.Alana Holmberg for The New York TimesThe vision may break down, however, when the tours try to figure out how to divide revenue. Men know their tour is more profitable and have long resisted equal partnerships with the women’s tour.Gaudenzi said more men, especially the younger generation, understand the importance of equality and are much more open to the concept of joining forces with the women than they were when he played in the 1990s.“They understand the value, you just have to show them the business case,” he said.He added: “We are in the entertainment business, so we have to entertain people, not ourselves.”Also, the plan de-emphasizes smaller tournaments, where players can collect appearance fees. A few of those are the most successful and popular events on the tour, such as the Estoril Open on the Portuguese Riviera, where players love the packed stadiums, seaside setting and full embrace of some of the region’s wealthiest companies, as well as the country’s president, Marcelo Rebelo de Sousa.Ackman said much of the maneuvering he has seen represents old-world thinking. That is partly why he aligned with the players, who have the most incentive to push for change. They are stars of the show but receive roughly 15 to 25 percent of the revenues — about half of what athletes in other sports receive.“Tennis is an oligopoly, and oligopolies are not innovative, and nonprofit ones are even less innovative,” Ackman said.Through his philanthropic fund, Ackman is helping to bankroll Djokovic’s Professional Tennis Players Association, a new players’ union, and the Winners Alliance, a player-controlled, for-profit entity, though he said he has no designs on profiting from tennis.Ackman made it clear that the P.T.P.A. was not seeking to launch a new tour, though in theory having an event like men’s golf’s annual Players Championship — considered a fifth major in some circles because of its top field and rich purse — would be appealing. He and the P.T.P.A. recently hired Ahmad Nassar, who for years ran the N.F.L. Players Association’s for-profit company, Players Inc.Nassar hopes to convince players and their agents to sign over their group licensing rights, which the Winners Alliance could in turn sell — to a video game company, a luxury hotel chain that could offer both payments and discount deals, or any number of potential corporate investors.Ahmad Nassar, hired as the executive director of the Professional Tennis Players Association, formerly ran the N.F.L. players’ union’s for-profit company.Alana Holmberg for The New York TimesThe P.T.P.A. spent much of the past six months recruiting its executive committee. The group now includes Paula Badosa, the rising Spanish player, and Ons Jabeur of Tunisia, the No. 2 women’s singles player and 2022 Wimbledon finalist who is the sport’s first major star from a Muslim country. Jabeur made it clear the organization doesn’t want any part of a golf-style dispute.“We don’t want to fight with everyone,” Jabeur said last Saturday, while expressing her determination to help the players get their due. “We just want to make our sport great.” More

    • 113 Shares159 Views

      in Tennis

      The Tennis Player Ons Jabeur Is Full of Surprises

      by

      She almost conquered Wimbledon and the U.S. Open and is making her first appearance at the WTA Finals.Ons Jabeur, a finalist at Wimbledon and the United States Open this year, is ranked a career-high No. 2. But the Tunisian star has never qualified for the year-end WTA Finals until this year, when she will be among the eight women competing in singles in Fort Worth.Jabeur, 28, the highest-ever-ranked African and Arab tennis player, combines deceptively fast foot speed with an ability to unnerve opponents with her spins, dips and drop shots. She said in a video call that sometimes when she saw a player try unsuccessfully to chase down one of her shots she had a hard time hiding a grin.The following interview has been edited and condensed.Have you ever been to Texas before?No, that’s why I’m going 10 days early, just so that I have time to adapt to the weather, to the court, to the round-robin system and everything else. And to try all the barbecue food they have.Would you call yourself the riskiest player on the WTA Tour?I like to surprise everyone not knowing what shot I’m going to go for. It can also put me at risk at the same time, but it’s good. I love the adrenaline about it.During your first eight years on tour you couldn’t break into the world’s Top 100. Do you think it was more technical, more tactical or more psychological?I think it was a little bit of everything. I was training hard. In my head I was doing everything right, but then during the matches I wasn’t patient enough to hold a long rally. Maybe I wasn’t fit enough at certain times to really back up my game because if you make people run you have to run as well.You played a lot of lower-level tournaments without making it to the WTA level. What kept you going?I think knowing deep inside that I belonged at the level to be one of the best tennis players really helped. And a lot of experts told me that my game was really different. Having too many options as a tennis player — slices, drop shots, hitting hard —- is tough. I had to put in my mind that I can do anything, but that I had to become more organized. Plus, I used to be everywhere, just traveling with a suitcase, and I didn’t have a base or a home. As soon as I got organized everything became clearer for me and all I needed to worry about was playing tennis.What was the turning point for you?In 2018, I was at a good level, but not the one I expected to be at. I got a little mad and told myself: “This is enough. I really need to go full and not stay in between.” Do whatever it takes to go forward and give myself the chance to be one of the best.Everyone talks about how popular you are with the other players and how you’re the minister of happiness. So what makes you mad?A lot of things make me mad, trust me. One of them is if my drop shot doesn’t work. I don’t like that. I like to be punctual. When people promise me something I like that they stick to it. I like good food, so bad food makes me angry as well. (Her favorite food is market loubia, a Tunisian white bean stew.)What’s your message to all those young women who are trying to be the next Ons Jabeur?A lot of people say you have to have a certain technique or certain ways to be fit. But every player is different, and you should play with what is yours. We’ve all been there. Just be patient and your time will come.What’s the most important thing you’ve learned about yourself?I always believe that I want to stay the person that I am. I don’t want to change to be No. 2 in the world or No. 2,000. There are a lot of players out there who can achieve even better than me. And that’s what the game is about. For me, the tennis career is short, so I want to be remembered as a great person, not just a great tennis player. More

    • 150 Shares119 Views

      in Tennis

      Iga Swiatek Downs Ons Jabeur to Win US Open Women’s Singles Title

      by

      Swiatek, the world No. 1, beat Jabeur in straight sets to capture her first U.S. Open singles title. It is her third Grand Slam title and first on a surface other than clay.The 2022 U.S. Open will always be remembered — outside of Poland, at least — for its farewell to Serena Williams, long the queen of tennis and the greatest women’s player ever.Beware, though, after Poland’s Iga Swiatek won the women’s singles title Saturday, beating Ons Jabeur of Tunisia Saturday afternoon at Arthur Ashe Stadium, the sport may have a new ruler on its hands.Swiatek, the world No. 1, lived up to her billing and beat Jabeur, 6-2, 7-6(5), to capture her first U.S. Open singles title. It was the third Grand Slam title of Swiatek’s brief career and her first on a surface other than clay.When Jabeur’s last forehand sailed long, Swiatek collapsed on her back after a 1 hour, 51 minute duel that got dangerously close as the afternoon wore on. After a first set that was over in 30 minutes, Swiatek and Jabeur took 81 minutes to finish the second as Jabeur battled back from a service break down twice to get the set into a tiebreaker before Swiatek ultimately prevailed.Swiatek, 21, won the French Open in 2020 and 2022, becoming the first Polish woman to win a Grand Slam singles title. And now she is the first Polish woman to win three and the U.S. Open, where she was the first Polish woman to make the singles final.How young is this new tennis queen? She is Gen-Z to the core. After the extended congratulatory hug with Jabeur, and a little bit of celebrating, she took a seat in her chair, pulled her phone from her bag and texted away as she awaited the trophy ceremony For Swiatek, the victory was the latest success in a season full of them. She won 37 consecutive matches and six consecutive titles from late winter to early summer. Those victories included the so-called Sunshine Double — winning both the BNP Paribas Open in Indian Wells, Calif., and the Miami Open in March and April.Those wins, on hard courts similar to those at the U.S. Open, announced Swiatek as a force on courts other than clay, on which she was already dominant. She has won so many 6-0 sets this year — a “bagel” in tennis parlance — that the saying “Iga’s bakery” was coined.Karsten Moran for The New York TimesSwiatek’s surge to the top came at an opportune time. In March, Ashleigh Barty of Australia, a three-time Grand Slam singles champion and the world No. 1, abruptly retired at 25 years old, saying she had accomplished all she wanted in the sport and was ready for a new challenge.In her departure, Barty, then the reigning Wimbledon and Australian Open champion, left a significant void in women’s tennis, which has largely been a free-for-all in recent years.No woman has won more than two Grand Slam titles in a calendar year since Williams won three in 2015. Since late 2020, Swiatek has done all she can to bring some order to women’s tennis, winning three of the past 10 Grand Slam titles.Beyond her dominance on the court, Swiatek has assumed a leadership role off it. She has spoken out against the Russian invasion of Ukraine more than any player who is not from Ukraine and has helped raise more than $2 million for relief efforts through her participation in tennis exhibitions, one of which she organized herself.“We’re trying to do our best to be good people,” she said during the trophy ceremony, as red-and-white Polish flags swung throughout the stands.On a lighter note, she was also among the players this summer who led an outcry over the balls that women use at the U.S. Open, which are different from those that men play with.From the start, all the signs pointed to this being Swiatek’s afternoon. During the warm-up, the sound system blasted AC/DC, one of her favorite bands. (Aerosmith and Led Zeppelin also have a major presence on her playlist.)Once the balls started flying, Swiatek gave little reason for anyone to believe that this match would go any differently from so many finals before. Coming in, Swiatek had played in 10 career finals. She has not lost one since her first, way back in 2019. Even more remarkably, she has not lost a set in any of those wins.“Iga never loses finals, so it is going to be very tough,” Jabeur said Thursday night, as Swiatek staged her second comeback in this tournament from a set down in her semifinal battle against Aryna Sabalenka of Belarus, a player she was especially determined not to lose to for a variety of reasons.Karsten Moran for The New York TimesAgainst Jabeur on Saturday, Swiatek ambushed from the start. She won 12 of the first 14 points, sprinting to a 3-0 lead. Jabeur climbed back, getting back on serve as Swiatek momentarily lost control of her overpowering forehand. But then Swiatek went right back to business, with a style that has become more clinical than fancy.With Jabeur putting up so little resistance, she didn’t need to do much more than hit deep into the court. Eventually, Jabeur either made an error or landed a shot somewhere around the service line, allowing Swiatek to move in and blast away. The first set was over in 30 minutes.The queens of women’s tennis historically have done this sort of thing.Jabeur, the first Arab woman to reach a Grand Slam final in the Open Era and to reach the highest level of the sport, has arguably the most creative arsenal in the women’s game. When she is on, she can mix jumping backhand drop shots with a dangerous forehand and a deceptively hard serve that she can land in the corners with nasty movement.She reached the Wimbledon final earlier this summer and held a one-set lead before tightening and getting overpowered by Elena Rybakina of Kazakhstan. Ahead of Saturday, she spoke of the lessons she had learned from that match and how she now knew ways to keep her emotions in check.But with Swiatek in top form, there was little that Jabeur, who has become an inspiration for Arab women, could do to stop the locomotive.“We’re going to get that title sometime soon,” she said after losing her second Grand Slam final of the year. “Hopefully this is the beginning of so many things.”The second set followed a similar pattern to the first at the beginning, with Swiatek surging to a 3-0 lead, Jabeur getting back on serve, and then Swiatek, seizing control right back in the sixth game to get within two games of the championshipFrom there, the only question was whether Swiatek’s occasionally shaky psyche might get the better of her or whether a crowd that swung to Jabeur’s side, begging her to extend the afternoon and make their high-price tickets worthwhile, might be able to rattle her.A few random knuckleheads started whistling in the middle of Swiatek’s service motion. A baby cried. Jabeur abandoned the cute stuff. No more variety for variety’s sake. She tried to match Swiatek’s power from the baseline. It worked as she evened the set at four games each.Ons Jabeur was overpowered early in the match but found her game in the second set.Desiree Rios/The New York TimesSwiatek is so different, though, from the fragile player who won her first Grand Slam title as a teenager. She has evolved from a player who cried in the bathroom during toilet breaks in the middle of matches into a problem solver.That player might never have had a prayer of prevailing in New York, where all the noise and commotion — passing trains and planes, fans who feel they have the right to long raucous matches and to help determine the outcome — make winning here such a different task from anywhere else.“It’s New York, so loud, so crazy,” she would say later of both her past two weeks and this match.Just keeping the ball in play was no longer working. Jabeur was sending her back and forth across the baseline and held chances to break Swiatek’s serve in the next game and serve for the second set. And just then, Swiatek figured out how to calm her nerves and dial back the mistakes. It wasn’t pretty, but it solved the problem, or at least stopped too many more from happening.Jabeur would stretch Swiatek, getting as close as anyone has in a Grand Slam final to winning a set. But in the tiebreaker, strokes that had become smooth and steady started sailing. On their final point, Swiatek’s first serve was not even close, and she lobbed in her second ball. The forehand Swiatek hit off Jabeur’s return floated into the middle of the court, but Jabeur couldn’t take advantage of it, and the championship was hers. There should be many, many more. More

    • 113 Shares149 Views

      in Tennis

      US Open Women’s Final: Iga Swiatek vs. Ons Jabeur

      by

      Swiatek will look to affirm her place as the top-ranked player, while Jabeur could become the first African woman to win the U.S. Open.Ons Jabeur of Tunisia also made it to the final at Wimbledon this year.Hiroko Masuike/The New York TimesIga Swiatek of Poland, the No.1-ranked woman, won 37 straight matches over the winter and spring.Hiroko Masuike/The New York TimesListening to the two women’s finalists in the U.S. Open, it can be easy to forget that tennis is a sport that involves strength, speed, athletic skill and some strategy.To Iga Swiatek, the world No. 1 from Poland, and Ons Jabeur of Tunisia, now a two-time Grand Slam finalist, the game is almost entirely a mental test.Yes, there is an opponent on the other side of the net trying to hit the ball past you. But the real opponent is the one inside your head, the one trying to remind you of the recent run of bad form, or the balls that you’ve had trouble controlling, or the heartbreaking loss you suffered the last time you played in a Grand Slam final.A little more than an hour after Swiatek, 21, outdueled Aryna Sabalenka of Belarus in three sets on Thursday, she reflected on what had made the difference. Sabalenka had overpowered Swiatek in the first set, but Swiatek drew even, then climbed out of trouble in the third set to win the final four games.The key, she said, was not the string of winners she decorated the court with, or an extra burst of energy from a summer training block. It was being able to control her emotions and not panic.“The work we’ve put in with Daria for sure helped,” she said, referring to the sports psychologist Daria Abramowicz, who has helped her find the tools to calm her nerves. “I think that’s basically the most important thing on the highest level.”Jabeur, a 28-year-old veteran whose game has only recently reached the level where she can regularly compete for the most important championships, constantly has her sports psychologist, Melanie Maillard, with her as well.She has been wearing a T-shirt that says “Face Your Fears” around the grounds of the tournament.“Losing finals is one of them,” she said, after thrashing Caroline Garcia of France, a rival since they were juniors, in the semifinals. “Face all the stress. I think the most important thing is accept that I’m playing a big final and accept all the emotions that are going to come my way.Familiarizing herself with that fear may be a worthwhile exercise. Swiatek has made 10 finals during her first three years as a full-time professional. She has won nine of them.“Iga never loses finals,” Jabeur said. “So it’s going to be very tough.”It’s fair to say that neither player expected to do all that well in this tournament, given their form in late July and August.Swiatek won 37 consecutive matches and six straight tournaments through the late winter and spring of this year. But the grass at Wimbledon, a surface she is still figuring out, threw her for a loop, causing a level of discomfort that has taken her all summer to recover from. She lost early in three tournaments, including in her hometown competition in Warsaw.Then she came to North America and struggled to control the kinds of balls that the U.S. Open uses. Less than two months removed from one of the best winning streaks in the modern history of the sport, she found herself not trusting her game.“My level of trust should for sure be higher,” Swiatek said. Instead of panicking, or crying in the bathroom between sets as she said she used to do, she has tried to accept her uncertainty and move on.“Maybe I’m the kind of person who is never going to trust myself,” she said.For Jabeur, the challenge in Saturday’s final is twofold. She has to manage Swiatek’s powerful forehand and unmatched ability to cover the court and hit backhands from a split, and also try to push to the recesses of her mind the baggage and scar tissue from losing in the Wimbledon final after winning the first set.She is the most creative player at the top of the game, capable of all kinds of tricks and spins. Sometimes she can too be creative, forgetting that she can also simplify the game and rely on her own powerful forehand and serve. Jabeur has won all six semifinals she has made this year, but just two of the finals. She would like to make it three on Saturday, but has already adopted a mind-set that will prevent her from getting too low if it doesn’t go that way.“I’m going full in. I’m going for everything,” she said of her mental approach. “I feel very positive about this one. The most important thing is not to regret, because I’m going to give it all on this one. Even if this one is not going to happen, I’m very sure that another one will come.” More