Speaker 1: It's a recording and progress, ah, recording is in progress. Okay, well, everybody,
Speaker 1: welcome to the renew Subcenters podcast. And I'm joined by
Speaker 1: my usual cohort, Caitlin Thompson. Because I am still in Australia. Yes,
Speaker 1: I know people are wondering have I moved back permanently?
Speaker 1: And let me tell you something. With what's going on
Speaker 1: in the United States, my passport back here is looking
Speaker 1: pretty good. I'm gonna I'm not gonna lie. And it's
Speaker 1: been good to be here throughout it all. And every
Speaker 1: now and again something comes up on my computer, on
Speaker 1: my phone or with the people that i'm my best
Speaker 1: friend who I'm staying with, her husband comes up and says,
Speaker 1: Jesus Christ, your ages. You see what happened today? Anyway,
Speaker 1: Joined by Caitlin Thompson. Caitlin, good day, mate, gooday.
Speaker 2: I've also been on the road a little bit and
Speaker 2: I have managed to leave the country and I thought
Speaker 2: should I just stay here?
Speaker 3: And I have to say I contemplated it for a minute.
Speaker 1: I'm sure I did. Anyway, It's it's scary what's happening
Speaker 1: the fact that the president might himself the president today
Speaker 1: of the Kennedy Center just because he can. Is hilarious
Speaker 1: to make.
Speaker 2: Bud is we can uh just do whatever we want now.
Speaker 2: So you want to call it the Gulf of America,
Speaker 2: I think we should call it the Golf of Tennis.
Speaker 3: Mom.
Speaker 2: Also the president of Kennedy Center, re Nice Stubs, is
Speaker 2: now the president of Tennis.
Speaker 3: Like we can just get it. No, we do whatever
Speaker 3: we want now.
Speaker 2: Great, I'm not paying a taxes and I'm going to
Speaker 2: be the chancellor of sport.
Speaker 1: Chancellor sports? What would I be?
Speaker 3: Vice Chancellor of sport?
Speaker 1: What the president?
Speaker 3: Because I thought of it. We have so much to
Speaker 3: talk about.
Speaker 2: Australian Open has only been done for a few days
Speaker 2: and we've already had tournaments few weeks over the last
Speaker 2: week or two. We had a tournament in Dallas. This
Speaker 2: was phenomenally entertaining. We had a tournament in two in
Speaker 2: the Middle East.
Speaker 3: Going on, talk us through some of the stuff that
Speaker 3: you've been seeing.
Speaker 2: Carlitos al Karaz got his first tittle of the seasons.
Speaker 2: Love came back, Beatsala does love Chapeau coming back?
Speaker 3: Man, what a great comeback.
Speaker 1: Give me your thoughts on it, because I'll be honest,
Speaker 1: I didn't watch a lot of it, just because you know,
Speaker 1: while I'm Australia. While I'm here in Australia, I try
Speaker 1: and like switch off from watching a lot of tennis.
Speaker 1: Even though I have the Renae Substams podcast. I'm more
Speaker 1: inclined to talk about our listeners writing into us today
Speaker 1: on the old Socials. But I want your thoughts on
Speaker 1: basically what you saw from those guys, especially Carlos. I
Speaker 1: mean to do and to win that tournament indoors. He
Speaker 1: had a really tough tournament. He was able to do it.
Speaker 1: That's got to even give him a ton of common EID.
Speaker 1: It's going into these big tournaments in Indian Wells.
Speaker 2: And Miami totally and you know, obviously he's on hard court.
Speaker 2: We saw him win the Surface Slams last year.
Speaker 3: Little known fact.
Speaker 2: I think Carlos's first title came indoors on hardcourt, did
Speaker 2: it not. He's actually got quite a resume on indoor
Speaker 2: hard courts, and it's nice to kind of see him
Speaker 2: prepping for this swing of the season that's going to
Speaker 2: be outdoors, but yes, on hard courts. It had been
Speaker 2: a minute since he won a sort of flashy title.
Speaker 3: I loved it. I have a lot of thoughts about
Speaker 3: the nose strip.
Speaker 2: I love that he's wearing a nose strip. You know, listen,
Speaker 2: we're all trying to optimize. I started wearing mouth tape
Speaker 2: at night, and kaspar UD's wearing a no strip and
Speaker 2: he gets to the finals of Dallas. So coincidence, I
Speaker 2: don't know. But maybe we should be doing this podcast
Speaker 2: with no strips.
Speaker 1: I mean, maybe we should. I mean that's just like
Speaker 1: that as an indicator for all of us that we
Speaker 1: all need to breathe a little bit better. But I mean,
Speaker 1: he came into the tournament not feeling well. So but
Speaker 1: he's done not a few times now. But for me,
Speaker 1: it's good for him because it started to be a
Speaker 1: little bit on now. He's done well on hardcot, he's
Speaker 1: won the US Open, he's won indoor titles before, et cetera.
Speaker 1: But it was starting to get to the point where,
Speaker 1: you know, is his game going to hold up through
Speaker 1: the next you know, ten, twelve, fifteen, hopefully twenty years
Speaker 1: playing indoors on fast courts, and he proved to everybody
Speaker 1: that he could do that. So I'm excited that he
Speaker 1: was able to get that title to give himself the
Speaker 1: confidence to know that he can go in and play
Speaker 1: on hard court against it's just can he do it
Speaker 1: against someone like a sinner, you know, with the big
Speaker 1: weapons that he has with the serve and the forehand,
Speaker 1: the groundies. But hey, listen, it was a good effort.
Speaker 2: Totally a good effort and nice to see him. This
Speaker 2: is typically part of the year that he's not usually
Speaker 2: that healthy. You know, in years past anywhe else he's
Speaker 2: shown up with some injuries. He I remember how to
Speaker 2: pull out of the Rear Open. I think it was
Speaker 2: last year, so you know, this is kind of like
Speaker 2: middle of the of the winter, late winter time period
Speaker 2: is I think a little tough on his party because
Speaker 2: obviously he goes pretty hard ahead of Australia. So yeah,
Speaker 2: like good signs, playing well, moving well and not on
Speaker 2: his favorite surface.
Speaker 3: Was great.
Speaker 2: The one that I was really excited about and I
Speaker 2: watched it a lot because it's in my time zone
Speaker 2: or close to it, was the Dallas Open, and you know,
Speaker 2: it was great to see Riley playing well. It was
Speaker 2: great to see Casper Rude make a final. There were
Speaker 2: some fun upsets by Shapavallave who beat Tommy Paul and
Speaker 2: Taylor Fritz back to back before taking out Casperud in
Speaker 2: the final. And for me, Shapavala has always been one
Speaker 2: of those exciting players. Obviously he's a shot maker. Obviously
Speaker 2: he goes for it, obviously with a big lefty, you know,
Speaker 2: the one handy, flashy. This is like the kind of
Speaker 2: player that is like super cat neep for me, and
Speaker 2: then like totally flames out because of all the reasons,
Speaker 2: which you know, Casperude is on the other end of
Speaker 2: the spectrum, who's like really safe, really smart, doesn't take a.
Speaker 3: Lot of risk, doesn't need to.
Speaker 2: So it was like that classic matchup that I just
Speaker 2: really love, especially when the shop Maker pulls it out
Speaker 2: and you know, look, does this pretend anything for shoppavalive season?
Speaker 2: Is he like a in the conversation now? I doubt it,
Speaker 2: But nonetheless it's fun to see a player that you
Speaker 2: haven't had a chance to talk about or really watch
Speaker 2: go deep in a long time do just that and
Speaker 2: lift a trophy over their head. Yeah.
Speaker 1: Look, he's always had the talent. We know that he's
Speaker 1: had these ups and downs. He's has these emotional ups
Speaker 1: and downs as well. It's been very well documented, and
Speaker 1: he's always had that You know the talent, but as
Speaker 1: Sam Stosa said last week, like talent is one thing, right,
Speaker 1: you know, people can assume you're going to do well,
Speaker 1: like a Madison Key's, like you keep talking about it,
Speaker 1: you should win a Grand Slam. Until you do it,
Speaker 1: you know, there's always going to be that speculation of, oh, oh,
Speaker 1: but you didn't do it, you know what I mean.
Speaker 1: So talent can only get you so far. But I
Speaker 1: think with him, he I think he's always going to
Speaker 1: have been better as he got older because he has
Speaker 1: such shot making and so many choices of shot and
Speaker 1: so flashy and so talented that it sort of takes
Speaker 1: you a little bit longer to get comfortable with what
Speaker 1: you need to do under pressure.
Speaker 3: And I hope, I hope that's true. I love it.
Speaker 1: Yeah, I do believe. I think he's actually going to
Speaker 1: have a very very good year. I would not be surprised,
Speaker 1: you know, if there's a potential of him getting back
Speaker 1: and you know, getting up to the top ten by
Speaker 1: this time next year. We know that he has the
Speaker 1: talent to do it. No, he has the weapons. It's
Speaker 1: just a matter of him controlling his emotions. It's a
Speaker 1: matter of him, you know, picking the right shot and
Speaker 1: shot selection is massive when you're that talented, and when
Speaker 1: you have sixteen shots that you can choose from, it's like, no, man,
Speaker 1: this one works. Just keep doing it, you know. And
Speaker 1: he's had sort of coaching ups and downs and hasn't
Speaker 1: really had so I just think I think we're going
Speaker 1: to see a lot from Dennis this year, and I
Speaker 1: think that he's it could potentially be the best US
Speaker 1: had in a long long time.
Speaker 2: I would love that, And also if that were to
Speaker 2: become true, I think it would portend well to this
Speaker 2: idea that like it is worth playing the long game
Speaker 2: in tennis and having the complete repertoire, even if it
Speaker 2: means you take longer to develop, because when you are
Speaker 2: on it's it's just that it's like, okay, you know,
Speaker 2: good great offense does be great defense in tatas, and
Speaker 2: I think that's I love matches that prove that thesis.
Speaker 1: Well, especially and let's face it, especially indoors, and so
Speaker 1: that definitely helps him. There's definitely a lot of players
Speaker 1: that really do just respond better indoors and they play
Speaker 1: better indoors, and I would say that would be him.
Speaker 1: But I do believe that, you know, he is going
Speaker 1: to only get better as he gets older, because all
Speaker 1: the all the bullshit kind of has to be gotten
Speaker 1: rid of at some point if you really want to
Speaker 1: be good. And I believe that he hopefully is getting
Speaker 1: more and mature and more into him being comfortable on
Speaker 1: the court of what to do under pressure anyway. So yeah,
Speaker 1: so very exciting. Was really happy to see him get
Speaker 1: that that tournament win. Just recently, Saballenka got taken out
Speaker 1: by Alexandrova. I thought that was interesting, tough, tough match.
Speaker 1: So Sablenka's kind of had two back to back losses
Speaker 1: and that's yeah, I been a rarity for her. But
Speaker 1: I like the fact that, can I just say, I
Speaker 1: like the fact that Mattie Keith decided, you know, like
Speaker 1: you've got to decide on your schedules, you know, early
Speaker 1: on in the year. And I think it's really great
Speaker 1: that Maddie has sort of put the racket down for
Speaker 1: a little bit and decided not to go to the
Speaker 1: Middle East totally.
Speaker 2: And I think especially after the high and the emotional,
Speaker 2: you know, culmination of not just a two week tournament,
Speaker 2: but really like decade of close calls. Yeah, like give
Speaker 2: yourself some breathing room. Come back to the States. Do
Speaker 2: you know, she probably doesn't have a ton of sponsor
Speaker 2: obligations there anyway, Come back, get your head sorted, spend
Speaker 2: some time soaking it up with your family, you know,
Speaker 2: instead of just going straight on to the other end
Speaker 2: trying to like, you know, do you get talked about
Speaker 2: as a favorite now?
Speaker 3: Honestly, it's kind of hard to imagine.
Speaker 2: But at the same time, like now everyone has a
Speaker 2: lot of questions for you when you were doing so well,
Speaker 2: just kind of flying under the radar. So yeah, I
Speaker 2: think that's really smart schedule management on her part, and
Speaker 2: also like she has so much of the year still
Speaker 2: to go. Winning the first Slam and is in a
Speaker 2: lot of ways like such a disruptive thing because you know,
Speaker 2: as we've seen Arena Sbalaca the last couple of years
Speaker 2: in Australia, like it's taken her a bit to find
Speaker 2: her footing again after starting off the year so hot
Speaker 2: in Australia, And so for me it feels like, Okay, actually,
Speaker 2: that's really smart and I love doing it. I don't
Speaker 2: know if she was at the super Bowl, but I
Speaker 2: do know who was at the super Bowl.
Speaker 1: Oh my god, I died. I don't know. I mean,
Speaker 1: I think every single person watching that that's a tennis
Speaker 1: fan or tennis person.
Speaker 2: I was like, that's azing, Like that's the arena. I
Speaker 2: was like, that's arena.
Speaker 1: And all of a sudden, I'm like, I'm loving Kendrick
Speaker 1: like it was great. It was such a in your
Speaker 1: face kind of like very obvious, like middle finger to
Speaker 1: certain people in America. Let's put of and and a
Speaker 1: someone in Canada, as we know, right, But the fact
Speaker 1: that all of a sudden, I'm looking at it and
Speaker 1: then it's the arena is dancing. I died. I fell
Speaker 1: off the couch myself. I was like, oh my god,
Speaker 1: there was Serena and I was like what I'm like,
Speaker 1: and then they showed her again. I was like very
Speaker 1: quick and then very quick and I died.
Speaker 3: And I knew when she was here in the Crip Park.
Speaker 2: I was like, there it is Center Corrida Olympics twenty twelve, shoes.
Speaker 1: Back exactly, and she looks great.
Speaker 2: So I was great.
Speaker 1: I was like, girl, Serena.
Speaker 3: Wins the super Bowl.
Speaker 1: Serena wins the super Bowl. It was it was frigging awesome.
Speaker 2: Tennis is the best even when it's not our sport,
Speaker 2: we still somehow managed.
Speaker 1: To win before the Super Bowl obviously was played or
Speaker 1: during that time. We have to talk about the fact
Speaker 1: that Belinda Benchic, she comes back after having a baby,
Speaker 1: wins the tournament in Abbadubby like what like how awesome
Speaker 1: is She's always played well in the Middle East, but
Speaker 1: she played great in Australia. I think the biggest, you know,
Speaker 1: issue that has always been her problem Belinda Benchitch is
Speaker 1: that her emotional you know, ups and downs. Let's let's saying,
Speaker 1: a little strappy on the court and a little bit
Speaker 1: sort of drama and dramatic and blah blah blah. And
Speaker 1: as you know, Caitlin, when you become a mom, things
Speaker 1: change in your brain a little bit. And I think that,
Speaker 1: you know, for her, her maturity level has gone through
Speaker 1: the roof and we're seeing it on the court and
Speaker 1: just just in the way that you know, she the
Speaker 1: players that she beat, I mean, beating the Rebakina as
Speaker 1: well in that tournament and then winning the tournament three
Speaker 1: cents against Ashlyn Krueger got to give her a lot
Speaker 1: of credit. Credit. This young American has really done well
Speaker 1: in the last twelve months. I give some kudos to
Speaker 1: Michael Joyce, her coach, who I know, you know, he
Speaker 1: did a great job with obviously Marie Sharapovo when she
Speaker 1: was younger, and I think he's a great coach for her.
Speaker 1: But yeah, it was really really great to see Belinda
Speaker 1: Benchitch win that match in three sets and have a
Speaker 1: baby right there with her husband, Like it was just
Speaker 1: too good.
Speaker 2: It does strike me that like when your focus off
Speaker 2: the court kind of gives you a little bit of equilibrium.
Speaker 2: And also she's so young still, so yeah, it's quite
Speaker 2: easy for her to come back after maternity leave as
Speaker 2: opposed to like, you know, older moms certainly, but I think, like, yeah,
Speaker 2: you're right, it gave her a little bit of equanimity.
Speaker 2: I didn't see her like, as Renee Stubbs would say,
Speaker 2: carrying on like a pork chap, which she is capable
Speaker 2: of doing either at this tournament nor at the Australian Open.
Speaker 2: So yeah, it was sort of like, okay, cool mom
Speaker 2: vibes in the best way passible.
Speaker 1: I mean she beat Victoria kuda Matova. Oh no, I
Speaker 1: mean I was like what when I saw that score,
Speaker 1: I was like what. Nice also to see Vondrosepha back
Speaker 1: as well, because she had a really tough start to
Speaker 1: the year. She beat Putin Saber in that tournament and
Speaker 1: beat Emma Radakanu. We're going to get to Emma in
Speaker 1: a second, but but nice to see if Ondressova back
Speaker 1: because that was a really tough start to the year.
Speaker 1: I was in Adelaide. She was playing really well. She
Speaker 1: was up a set and to want to I think
Speaker 1: against Putin Saber actually who she beaten in Abu Dhabi,
Speaker 1: but she pulled up No, no, it was it was Schneider.
Speaker 1: But she pulled up hurt with a hamstring sort of
Speaker 1: something going on in a leg, and I thought, no,
Speaker 1: you've got to be kidding. Her first tournament back and
Speaker 1: she's already injured again. But it was nice to see
Speaker 1: her back playing so quickly after, you know what what
Speaker 1: We weren't sure what was wrong with her, and so
Speaker 1: I'm just happy because Vondress of us just fun. She's
Speaker 1: just a really good time and it was smiling.
Speaker 2: She's got a cool game. She's yeah, it's like a
Speaker 2: really good cool she's cool, she's got cool tattoos. It's
Speaker 2: just like there's a lot of like good vibes around her,
Speaker 2: and I feel like she's especially for one of the
Speaker 2: chech players who you know certainly there's a cohord of them.
Speaker 3: She's like kind of.
Speaker 2: Loose in a way that's a little fun and a
Speaker 2: little bit unexpected, in a way that I absolutely love.
Speaker 3: So yeah, no, dress was great.
Speaker 2: Let's get to Ema rad Kano and then I also
Speaker 2: want to talk about the the robots.
Speaker 1: Let's get to Emma d Kana when we when we
Speaker 1: do our question, so what we're going to do? I
Speaker 1: sent out a tweet or a on the socials to
Speaker 1: send me send us your questions, so let's get to them.
Speaker 1: I don't know if we're going to be able to
Speaker 1: get to them all the so many, but one of
Speaker 1: the let's start with the Blue Sky, because we love
Speaker 1: Blue Sky. Mister Derek Price asked Stubbsy, what can you
Speaker 1: legally say about the allegations against Rebeckian his coach? His
Speaker 1: band has been extended, so let's get into the rebuckin
Speaker 1: his story. Caitlin, what are your.
Speaker 3: Thoughts good for the WTA. I said it before and
Speaker 3: I'll say it again.
Speaker 2: They issued this ban provisionally ahead of the Australian Open
Speaker 2: as everyone suspected he might. He blew right through it
Speaker 2: and showed up anyway and did all sorts of continuation
Speaker 2: of seemingly what he was accused of doing, and he
Speaker 2: kind of put you know again. Unfortunately, Elena Rebarkin in
Speaker 2: a terrible spot. Gronie Vinisovitch leaves the camp, as we
Speaker 2: all sort of predicted he would, with this situation to
Speaker 2: get worse, and it did. And then the WTA, to
Speaker 2: their great credit, said okay, well we have receipts and
Speaker 2: we're going to release the information. So now we are
Speaker 2: no longer sort of actually protecting you by not releasing
Speaker 2: this stuff, but now sort of your you know, you're
Speaker 2: the details are now for public consumption.
Speaker 3: It is sad, it is terrible.
Speaker 2: Nobody deserves to be treated like this, certainly not by
Speaker 2: a coach, and it is implicated in the WTA's official
Speaker 2: findings that he is also her romantic partner. All sorts
Speaker 2: of questions arise about coercion abuse, you know, those are
Speaker 2: the right questions to ask. We don't know all the
Speaker 2: answers to them. All we can say is, obviously everybody
Speaker 2: is rooting for Elena Robacchina, who's a by all accounts
Speaker 2: incredibly lovely young woman, but.
Speaker 3: Good for them.
Speaker 2: This is not only creating because I have seen people
Speaker 2: say like, oh, well, who cares, Like it's her choice,
Speaker 2: and it's like, no, no, no. If this is your place
Speaker 2: of work and someone else is being abusive in your
Speaker 2: place of work, and by all accounts, this had so
Speaker 2: many witnesses, so many receipts, so many different points of view,
Speaker 2: even if they are not being abusive towards you at
Speaker 2: this exact moment, just knowing that the tour or your
Speaker 2: workplace is tolerating somebody behaving this way makes you the
Speaker 2: factor less safe. It makes other people less safe. It's
Speaker 2: just the right thing to do is to nip this
Speaker 2: in the bud in a environment where sports governing bodies
Speaker 2: move glacially and conservatively. The WTA seemingly did neither.
Speaker 1: Chapeau yep, I agree so well said, I don't really
Speaker 1: need to add anything more to that other than the
Speaker 1: fact that, look, you know, some of us know a
Speaker 1: lot more than others. I clearly was around this toxic
Speaker 1: environment with him and her quite often. I've spoken about
Speaker 1: it on the pod many times, and you know people
Speaker 1: that say, well, it's her decision. Yes, it is her decision.
Speaker 1: But you know, there's a lot of there's a lot
Speaker 1: of coheresive control relationships that get really toxic and really bad.
Speaker 1: And do I think that she's in, you know, an
Speaker 1: environment that is not healthy for absolutely, there's no question
Speaker 1: about it. You don't see, you know, her coach Goron
Speaker 1: Ivanisovitch decide after this time, even though he enjoyed working
Speaker 1: with her, say I'm out of here because he clearly
Speaker 1: has seen stuff that he's not okay with too. But
Speaker 1: also the fitness trainer, you know, who's been there for
Speaker 1: a long long time, you know, and.
Speaker 2: Clearly if any BEDDA would know, it would be this person.
Speaker 1: Yeah, and he's gone as well. And you know, when
Speaker 1: you have the information that they have, there's clearly people
Speaker 1: in her camp or around her enough to say the
Speaker 1: things that have been said about what he has said
Speaker 1: and done to her. And so in that respect, that
Speaker 1: is her work environment. As you said, saying sorry unacceptable.
Speaker 1: Banned for a year, and I think it's you know,
Speaker 1: quite quite honestly, he should be banned forever on the
Speaker 1: WTA tour. He should not be allowed to be able
Speaker 1: to come on the tour and work with any girl,
Speaker 1: because that's his tendency, particularly when you've got someone who's
Speaker 1: like lovely and as nice and as great players as Elina.
Speaker 1: So I think it's been a really good move. Now
Speaker 1: what is she going to do with the personally? Again?
Speaker 1: Now that's her decision and it's not good, so we'll see.
Speaker 2: Yeah, I mean feeling for her, but yeah, well side
Speaker 2: steps in all right. Greek Blu questions, kiping co Ja Rube.
Speaker 1: I'm starting to think changes in tournaments are sort of
Speaker 1: like corporate greed, like the date expansions in the US
Speaker 1: Open mixed doubles event, which we'll should get to, but
Speaker 1: it is it, but it is a business. Thoughts. What
Speaker 1: do you think of the mixed doubles situation and the
Speaker 1: extended tournaments, Caitlin.
Speaker 2: I want you to answer that question first, because I
Speaker 2: actually think my answer may be controversial, and oh, I know.
Speaker 1: Where you're going with this. I don't understand this move. Now.
Speaker 1: What I know is, yes, I understand that they're trying
Speaker 1: to make mixed doubles more attractive, They're trying to make
Speaker 1: mixed doubles more important, but in the trying to make
Speaker 1: it more of a showcase, I get all of that,
Speaker 1: but to put it in the week before the tournament.
Speaker 1: Do not tell me it's part of the tournament. It
Speaker 1: is during qualifying, okay, it's not during the tournament. And
Speaker 1: it feels like a complete side show. It now feels
Speaker 1: like an exhibition of a mixed doubles event. That's what
Speaker 1: it feels like, and that to me is not okay
Speaker 1: when it comes to handing out a Grand Slam title
Speaker 1: at the end of the day. And I feel like
Speaker 1: in the second week of the US Open, you know,
Speaker 1: you struggle to have matches on the outside court for
Speaker 1: people that you know, want to buy a grounds pass
Speaker 1: and come and see the tennis, and now there's going
Speaker 1: to be a lot less matches going on out there.
Speaker 1: They'll have juniors, which is great, and they'll have doubles,
Speaker 1: which is great, but not to have the mixed it
Speaker 1: feels just like it's an exhibition and to four games, like,
Speaker 1: what are we doing here? It's an exhibition. It's not
Speaker 1: a Grand Slam event anymore. That's how I feel. It's
Speaker 1: not good.
Speaker 2: I yeah, I wanted you to go first, not because
Speaker 2: I necessarily disagree with anything you said, but I think
Speaker 2: like that bears being said and that's all true, full stop.
Speaker 2: The four game thing feels like, what are we doing here?
Speaker 3: Do you want to? Should we just like do tiddleywinks?
Speaker 3: Or you know, why don't we just.
Speaker 1: Right?
Speaker 3: I kind of understand the qualities week.
Speaker 2: In the sense that you know, when you go to
Speaker 2: some of these matches in the second week of a Slam,
Speaker 2: it's the best players at this event and there's nobody
Speaker 2: watching them, and that sucks. It sucks for the tournament,
Speaker 2: It sucks for the players, and it sucks for the
Speaker 2: fans who could or would be there but probably can't
Speaker 2: afford the finals or don't want to, aren't fervent enough
Speaker 2: fans to uh you know, show up for anything but
Speaker 2: the finals of the singles, right, Because they tend to
Speaker 2: put the singles in the doubles on the same day,
Speaker 2: on the same ticket, right, it doesn't help with the
Speaker 2: point that I think you also made when we were
Speaker 2: talking about this a little earlier, which is like, the
Speaker 2: one of the reasons they do this is one of
Speaker 2: the reasons they keep doubles and mixed and all the
Speaker 2: other events to the legends, the Whillies, the juniors to
Speaker 2: the second week is as the tournament field and singles
Speaker 2: gets thinned out. There's just like simply not enough matches
Speaker 2: to justify like the grounds and the entirety of the stadium. Right,
Speaker 2: if there's only one thing going on in the stadium,
Speaker 2: then what are we doing here? You're gonna come all
Speaker 2: the way to Queen's for one match? So yeah, this
Speaker 2: doesn't solve that. I do sort of feel for the
Speaker 2: tournaments who are trying very hard to make money. Obviously
Speaker 2: the Slams need the least a person.
Speaker 1: I'm like, calm, the farm makes so much freakin' money.
Speaker 1: They make more money on honeyduces than you and I
Speaker 1: will make in our fucking lifetime.
Speaker 3: Absolutely true.
Speaker 2: That said, they were trying to market the game and
Speaker 2: make sure that it's reaching people and top of funnel fans.
Speaker 2: I don't mind the experimentation. And here comes my controversial opinion.
Speaker 2: I love doubles. You love doubles. I love watching doubles.
Speaker 2: Playing doubles doubles is important. It's important to me, and
Speaker 2: I actually go to these matches and I watched them
Speaker 2: on TV because I care about them. I do think
Speaker 2: that we it is a long time since you played
Speaker 2: doubles with Stephan Graff and you know John Mcap.
Speaker 1: Of course, the top players don't play doubles anymore. And yes,
Speaker 1: I mean I was beating. So when my Grandslam titles
Speaker 1: the likes of Kim Clyiks and Martina Hingis.
Speaker 3: You played the Williams sisters and.
Speaker 1: William Yeah, of course I played all the top.
Speaker 2: The single, probably most exciting match I've ever sat at
Speaker 2: in my whole life was when center court Wimbledon, Andy
Speaker 2: Murray and Serena Williams.
Speaker 3: Come out to play mixed doubles. It was so cool.
Speaker 2: The stadium lost its mind, and I didn't really care
Speaker 2: about anything else that was going on in the tournament,
Speaker 2: certainly not singles, because I was watching Andy Murray and
Speaker 2: Serena Willing played mixed doubles together. So I do think
Speaker 2: there does need to be a little bit of a rejiggering,
Speaker 2: you know. Riley o'poka a couple of years ago suggested
Speaker 2: a very controversial idea that might have some.
Speaker 3: Legs, which is like, if you are in.
Speaker 2: The singles field, if you qualified to be in a
Speaker 2: singles field, do you get an automatic entry into the
Speaker 2: doubles or should you perhaps bump double specialists. I'm not
Speaker 2: saying I believe in that, but I think it was
Speaker 2: an interesting idea.
Speaker 1: I'm not opposed to that. I this is going to
Speaker 1: be a controversial take from me because people are going
Speaker 1: to be like, you should be protecting the doubles players.
Speaker 1: I've said for a long time, if you're not in
Speaker 1: the top twenty or thirty at least playing doubles only,
Speaker 1: you're not a very good tennis player, right.
Speaker 3: I have said that. You've said that, and.
Speaker 1: It's like, if you're playing doubles only, you should be
Speaker 1: schooling people in doubles. You should be, you know, the best.
Speaker 3: In the world. You know.
Speaker 1: There wasn't a time I don't believe in like the
Speaker 1: last fifteen years of my career, I wasn't in the
Speaker 1: top ten and doubles. I mean, that's what you should
Speaker 1: be if you're concentrating only, I'm playing doubles only, and
Speaker 1: there are not enough singles players playing doubles. There's no
Speaker 1: question about that. Doubles has become a little bit There
Speaker 1: are some doubles only specialist players out there that I'm like, ah,
Speaker 1: really like this is not a great look, you know,
Speaker 1: and they're making and they are making so much money, right,
Speaker 1: I mean. I was asked recently by the girl I've
Speaker 1: been helping a little bit, Elan Perez, you know what
Speaker 1: was the most money you ever made in a year,
Speaker 1: And I said, ah, I think close to eight hundred thousand, which, hey,
Speaker 1: I'm not that's a lot of money. I'm not complaining
Speaker 1: about that. But that year I won two Grand Slam
Speaker 1: doubles titles, two Grand Slam Mixed doubles titles, and the
Speaker 1: WTA finals, along with like five other tournaments. And I
Speaker 1: only won eight hundred thousand. If I did that now,
Speaker 1: I'd be making two million dollars. So I'm like, don't
Speaker 1: complain about it. Make yourself better. If you're top fifty,
Speaker 1: it's not good enough. So I'm okay with like having
Speaker 1: top players play in these events and making it a
Speaker 1: little bit more, But to make it best, to make
Speaker 1: it to four games, that's a joke. That's just making
Speaker 1: fun of the event and trying to make it. It's
Speaker 1: an exhibition. It's an exhibition. Let's just fuck it is.
Speaker 3: It is definitely an exhibition.
Speaker 1: It's a mixed doubles exhibition before the US Open, and
Speaker 1: we're to crown and winner and we're going to put
Speaker 1: it on slap it on the winner of the two
Speaker 1: thousand and twenty five US Open Mixed doubles along with
Speaker 1: all the other former champions was this team and that's it,
Speaker 1: And so will it change? I don't know. Will we
Speaker 1: get top players singles players playing mixed doubles maybe? I
Speaker 1: don't know. But they're trying to do what Indian Wells did,
Speaker 1: which is have that little exhibition thing before the tournament.
Speaker 1: And I think they had something before the US Open
Speaker 1: last year on one night. Ye make sense, Like they're
Speaker 1: obviously trying to do something like that, but don't dumb
Speaker 1: it down to top to best of four games like
Speaker 1: first to four or whatever. That's that's where I draw
Speaker 1: the line. It's a joke anyway, to be contented.
Speaker 2: I feel like we might have some more chew over
Speaker 2: on this as as more details merge to be continued.
Speaker 1: Okay, so order in the court love that name. On
Speaker 1: any thoughts on whether Janick Sinner getting a lengthy suspension
Speaker 1: from CASS would prompt the powers that be intended to
Speaker 1: take a stand with wider and finally say enough is
Speaker 1: enough with blindly applying rules just for the sake of
Speaker 1: the rules. Now, I don't think it's casts that are
Speaker 1: doing this, that it's wider that they're trying to give
Speaker 1: him a extended stay at home. Let's put it that way.
Speaker 1: But my thing on this is I've said it before,
Speaker 1: so I don't want to get into it too long today.
Speaker 1: But last year, why are you moving the goalpost? It's
Speaker 1: just wholeseshit. If the it IA has decided that he
Speaker 1: was not at fault and now you want to change
Speaker 1: the rules and say, oh, we've got to make sure
Speaker 1: the team are at fault as well, and you've got
Speaker 1: to pay the price for that, and like, meanwhile, this
Speaker 1: is like almost a year later and he's won two
Speaker 1: Grand Slam Since are we What are we doing here?
Speaker 2: My thoughts can best be summed up about a lot
Speaker 2: of this and a lot of things, and tell us
Speaker 2: is just what are we doing here?
Speaker 1: Yeah? What are we doing here? That's going to be
Speaker 1: the name answers what I know, I've already picked the
Speaker 1: name of the pod. What are we doing here?
Speaker 3: Sometimes it just jumps out of here.
Speaker 1: It's a joke, But I think the player What I
Speaker 1: thought you were going to say is that we need
Speaker 1: a stronger player union to make sure that you know
Speaker 1: that I agree that we do, all right, Caviti Cat says,
Speaker 1: can you explain why the yon X racket suits Madison
Speaker 1: Keys more than the Wilson she had been using? Is
Speaker 1: it lighter, balanced differently as a pro does the racket
Speaker 1: make that much difference? And just because her explanation was
Speaker 1: the X is a unique squareish shape, does that really
Speaker 1: make a difference? Have you tested them out? Well, I'll
Speaker 1: take this one first, and Caitlin, I know that you
Speaker 1: like the YONYX rackets as well. I think it was
Speaker 1: the bottom line is this racket gave her more power? Okay,
Speaker 1: and you're probably thinking wide in Madison Keys need more power. Well,
Speaker 1: she doesn't feel like she's got to absolutely redline the
Speaker 1: racket to get the power. And also, you know she
Speaker 1: did change the strings about a year ago to go
Speaker 1: to all polly, which gives her more control on the ball.
Speaker 1: So she took out the gut, which if anyone that's
Speaker 1: played with gut knows, which I have as well, sometimes
Speaker 1: you lose control when you get a bit nervous, so
Speaker 1: the ball flies on you. So it's just a little
Speaker 1: bit lighter. It's giving her a lot more power without
Speaker 1: her having to red line everything, and I think just
Speaker 1: the combination of everything has just been so good for
Speaker 1: her clearly.
Speaker 3: Yeah, I agree.
Speaker 2: I don't have much to add. I actually am sort
Speaker 2: of surprised at this move. I've played with Berth theon
Speaker 2: X and Wilson rackets. Wilson rackets are balanced more heavily
Speaker 2: typically in the head, which given her long swing, actually
Speaker 2: kind of makes sense to me. But the UNIX because
Speaker 2: it's sweet spot, is like larger because that unique head shape.
Speaker 2: As Caviti cat noted, you know, I think we're seeing
Speaker 2: her play with like more margin and more power.
Speaker 3: So yeah, I mean, obviously it's a great fit.
Speaker 2: It's not a great look to lose your like longtime
Speaker 2: athlete to a rival and then like the first thing
Speaker 2: they do after twenty years of playing with your rockets
Speaker 2: is when their first Grand Slam with a competing product. So,
Speaker 2: you know, Wilson, I don't know, maybe they're like on notice,
Speaker 2: maybe I don't care.
Speaker 3: I don't know, but yeah, it's well, they should care.
Speaker 3: They should care.
Speaker 2: It seems like after you know, losing Fed, losing Serena,
Speaker 2: they don't have a ton of players on the men's side.
Speaker 2: You were playing with their rackets and outside of Arena soublanca,
Speaker 2: which is hard to argue with from a results standpoint,
Speaker 2: But outside of arena, you know, the ranks are getting
Speaker 2: pretty thin on a good old team Wilson, So I
Speaker 2: don't know.
Speaker 1: I remember Lisa Raimond, Myle Dobs partner. She played with
Speaker 1: the classic Prince grap for Evan loved it, and I
Speaker 1: remember her. I remember her telling me a couple of
Speaker 1: years ago she started using that red YONEX. She's like,
Speaker 1: oh my god, this is the best racket I've ever used,
Speaker 1: and which I found really unique because of the waste
Speaker 1: she plays. And I've hit with the X record as well,
Speaker 1: And I think the bottom line is they just are
Speaker 1: so good at getting products made so well, the Japanese,
Speaker 1: they are just so good at it. And I think,
Speaker 1: oh my god, they've got to be so pumped about
Speaker 1: this conversation that is round Madison Keys and her racket change.
Speaker 2: Yeah, when a racket is so closely associated with a
Speaker 2: player the way that that was with with Maddie, and
Speaker 2: then a change happens, and then a result of this,
Speaker 2: like it's so striking and you don't even have to
Speaker 2: be like a die heard tennis fan. I think to
Speaker 2: notice to notice this, but yeah, it was. It is
Speaker 2: sort of notable.
Speaker 1: Love it, good question, Love it? Okay? Jill counts the
Speaker 1: beck says why did the bulk of tennis media gloss
Speaker 1: over zverevg curios? How come ESPN protects them both and
Speaker 1: in one case pays them for commentary. Also thoughts on
Speaker 1: Hallip's legacy. Oh we just you're getting two for one,
Speaker 1: aren't you, Jill.
Speaker 2: Woll Jill just ask all the hard questions.
Speaker 3: Huh.
Speaker 1: First of all, Jill, if you followed our podcast, you
Speaker 1: would know exactly that this media, me and Caitlin and
Speaker 1: everyone in between on this call has never glossed over Zverev.
Speaker 1: We have talked about him at nauseum. Caitlin even had
Speaker 1: a very big story in her magazine a few years
Speaker 1: ago that was quite controversial, and she's had to deal
Speaker 1: with that through the years. But we don't gloss over it.
Speaker 1: But what do you want us to do about it?
Speaker 1: I mean, we don't have a.
Speaker 2: Great question aim it at the Athletic, the Tennis channel,
Speaker 2: Sky Sports, BBC, Eurosport. Actually, Eurosport is probably the worst
Speaker 2: defender because they employ his brother and seem to be
Speaker 2: very very keen on glassing over any let's say, Pecadilla's
Speaker 2: around the discussion. So yeah, I think it sort of
Speaker 2: depends on where you look. As for curious. You know, again,
Speaker 2: this podcast has been pretty clear about, uh, you know
Speaker 2: what grit Nick is great at, which used to be tennis,
Speaker 2: and what he is currently great at, which is playing himself.
Speaker 2: And I think we can probably leave it at that.
Speaker 1: Hey, I mean, it's very difficult for me to like
Speaker 1: sit here and rip on Maks. Uh, you know, would
Speaker 1: be really stupid for me to do. But at the
Speaker 1: same time, and I've said this many times about Nick,
Speaker 1: he is an amazing analyst, Like he is actually really
Speaker 1: fucking good at analyzing tennis, which is a shame because
Speaker 1: everything else he does is ridiculous. And I think, you know,
Speaker 1: the stuff that he puts out on the social media's,
Speaker 1: particularly this fight with about and with Thinner, is ridiculous
Speaker 1: and it's not a good look. And I've said many
Speaker 1: many times the Nick chuse himself in the foot and
Speaker 1: it's not for me. I don't pay the checks and
Speaker 1: I don't employ the people on television, So it's aimed
Speaker 1: at other people, don't aim it at us. We do
Speaker 1: not gloss over what we think of these two and
Speaker 1: how a Lott's legacy. We talked about it last week
Speaker 1: with Sam. Look, I think she'll go down as one
Speaker 1: of the great fighters in tennis. She's, you know, this
Speaker 1: tiny little girl from Romania became an incredible tennis player,
Speaker 1: and her legacy is somebody that I will always respect
Speaker 1: her as a tennis player. I will always respect her
Speaker 1: work ethic, her fight, her emotional ups and downs and
Speaker 1: working her way through those and finally getting a couple
Speaker 1: of Grand Slain Belt titles under a belt. And to me,
Speaker 1: she'll always be that person.
Speaker 2: To me.
Speaker 3: Great.
Speaker 2: I think she's that with a little bit of an
Speaker 2: astress for me, and I'll kind of leave it.
Speaker 1: Of course, of course, there'll always be the asterisk, and
Speaker 1: that is you know, and let me tell you something.
Speaker 1: If she was, in her eyes innocent and it was
Speaker 1: given to her and she didn't know it and all
Speaker 1: that sort of stuff by her team, I feel really
Speaker 1: badly for her, because you never want to have that
Speaker 1: asterisk next to your name. She will go into the
Speaker 1: Hall of Fame. They've already the Hall of Fame have
Speaker 1: already set that precedent by putting Maria Sharapo over in there,
Speaker 1: so Hallott will go in and if they don't put
Speaker 1: a halipin then you're like, well, what the fuck? So
Speaker 1: Helup's going into the Hall of Fame. And so it's
Speaker 1: just a shame that if she is completely innocent of
Speaker 1: it and it was given to her by her team,
Speaker 1: I feel really bad for her. On the other hand,
Speaker 1: if she didn't know about it, then you know, two
Speaker 1: thumbs down.
Speaker 3: But two thumbs still.
Speaker 1: We'll never know, all right. Buffy Burford said, what is
Speaker 1: your thoughts about tournaments using different brand balls and complaints
Speaker 1: that some brands are inferior and might be causing injuries
Speaker 1: from overhitting flat balls. Well, first of all, Buffy love
Speaker 1: the name. There's no such thing as a flat ball.
Speaker 1: If it's flat, it gets thrown right back to the
Speaker 1: umpire and told to change it out. But there are
Speaker 1: different brands. There's Dunlop obviously that's been a little bit
Speaker 1: of controversial side. There's Wilson, there's Pens, there's all kinds
Speaker 1: of things. Here's the difference and here's the problem here,
Speaker 1: and where the problem lies money money mone When the
Speaker 1: tournament gets balls given to them for free because they
Speaker 1: are a sponsor. They take that because the amount of
Speaker 1: tennis balls that get used as a tournament are enormously
Speaker 1: there's a lot, so you have to understand that the
Speaker 1: tournament is taking a sponsor, and the sponsor is free
Speaker 1: tennis balls and sometimes some money given to the tournament
Speaker 1: to use those balls. So it's never going to change
Speaker 1: until we have a uniformed ball in tennis, and the
Speaker 1: tournaments and the Grand Slams and you know, all get
Speaker 1: together and say this is going to be our one ball.
Speaker 1: For example, in the NBA, it's Wilson, right, they use
Speaker 1: a Wilson basketball. That's not going to change.
Speaker 2: American Chancellor of Sport is ready to rule, are really
Speaker 2: and one ball and one ball only?
Speaker 1: Yeah? I think that would be great.
Speaker 3: Caitlin for and Slazenger, that's it.
Speaker 1: Lazenger, are you out of your fing mind?
Speaker 2: I didn't add that's no questions at this time?
Speaker 1: Wow, Well, what are you Trump? You're just like unilaterally
Speaker 1: just changing the shit.
Speaker 2: This is what we do. I'm a chancellor. I didn't
Speaker 2: say I was the president. This isn't that a diplomacy,
Speaker 2: This is that a democracy.
Speaker 1: I just like I'm the president of the Ken Kennedy
Speaker 1: center the.
Speaker 2: Lateral decision, making my bile pick as Chancellor Slazenger.
Speaker 1: Next question, all right, well here we go. All right,
Speaker 1: Pop fails. What do you think of this proposal to
Speaker 1: get more top players playing doubles? Double the prize money
Speaker 1: for people who play both. If you lose first round,
Speaker 1: you get double what you would have gotten. Still, I
Speaker 1: can't find a flaw in it other than the cost. Well,
Speaker 1: I will say Pop fails. We sort of touched upon
Speaker 1: it already. We do want more top players playing. And
Speaker 1: one of the reasons why I believe that top players
Speaker 1: don't play doubles anymore like they did in the old
Speaker 1: days is because the prize money is so enormous in
Speaker 1: singles they don't need to play doubles. You know, when
Speaker 1: I played back in the seventeen seventies, you know, the
Speaker 1: prize money to win a singles event might have been
Speaker 1: one hundred thousand dollars to win a huge event, and
Speaker 1: you thought, Okay, that's a lot of money, and you're
Speaker 1: winning doubles. I mean, I remember winning Miami and Miami
Speaker 1: and Indian Wells, two huge tournaments that pay way over
Speaker 1: one hundred thousand dollars to win the doubles. Now I
Speaker 1: was winning that to win Grand Slams, and I was
Speaker 1: winning maybe twenty five thousand to win those tournaments, which
Speaker 1: again I'm not you know, there's a lot of people
Speaker 1: out there going, oh, fuck are you that's a lot
Speaker 1: of money. But now they're winning well over one hundred
Speaker 1: for those tournaments. The top singles players don't need to
Speaker 1: play doubles for money anymore because they're winning so much
Speaker 1: money in bingles. So yes, is it an idea to
Speaker 1: put more double money into doubles. I think there's one
Speaker 1: thing about the US Open. They make the draw a
Speaker 1: little bit you know less, But then again, the problem
Speaker 1: is you won't have the top players playing, so I
Speaker 1: can understand why they're trying to do this. But we'll
Speaker 1: see if if any of the top players play in
Speaker 1: this mixed doubles event, and that will answer our questions,
Speaker 1: I guess, and how much well TV show it, because
Speaker 1: the ESPN does show the week before the US Open.
Speaker 1: We are on ESPN Plus, so I don't know. We'll see,
Speaker 1: But I like your idea, pop Fils, It's not a
Speaker 1: bad one. You've got nothing.
Speaker 2: My answer is wrapped up in a larger structural change
Speaker 2: but you join the swams. You join the slams into
Speaker 2: a consortium with a few masters one thousands, you probably
Speaker 2: get rid of the tours. You have on one side
Speaker 2: the tournaments. On the other side of the players, they
Speaker 2: split the entire PI fifty to fifty. They come together
Speaker 2: in an annual meeting. They have a union. On one side,
Speaker 2: they have the ownership on the other. They negotiate rule changes, updates,
Speaker 2: schedule blah blah blah. Fewer events, all mandatory, all big deals,
Speaker 2: all in cool places. We can't agree on which places
Speaker 2: they are, but you know we'll table that. And then
Speaker 2: you have everybody agreeing that for these fewer amounts of tournaments,
Speaker 2: they will play all the events, and they will play
Speaker 2: all the events because that is and you know, everybody
Speaker 2: pays into the system. You get a base salary, the
Speaker 2: tour takes care of, you know, the bottom type the top.
Speaker 2: You know, are subsidizing a little bit the bottom. But
Speaker 2: also make sure that ecosyism healthy. Then you don't have
Speaker 2: crazy ideas like it next. So turn it at the beginning,
Speaker 2: because if I can't see colors Acaaz play in week
Speaker 2: two of a Slam because he lost in the second
Speaker 2: round I can still see him play deep because mixed
Speaker 2: doubles and doubles doesn't start until week two, So I
Speaker 2: wonder maybe that's it.
Speaker 1: I wonder if Corlins the Akaraz will play with Radakanu
Speaker 1: in the mixed doubles.
Speaker 3: Let's talk about RADICANU. Please ask that question now?
Speaker 1: Oh well, I have to go back. Let's let's all
Speaker 1: right fine. Someone asked me if I would consider coaching Radakanu,
Speaker 1: what's the first thing you would do with her? I
Speaker 1: would consider it, of course, yes, her game. I'll never
Speaker 1: say no to an opportunity of working with the Grand
Speaker 1: Slam champion. Oh god, there's what would I work on? Well?
Speaker 1: I think the first thing I would do is sit
Speaker 1: her down and ask what she wants. And I think
Speaker 1: that's the key. You have to know what your player wants.
Speaker 2: It does seem like maybe nobody's done that.
Speaker 1: Yes, I think they all come in thinking, oh, I'm
Speaker 1: going to tweak this, and I'm going to tweak that.
Speaker 1: I'm going to do this, and that's a very I
Speaker 1: would sit her down and say, what, let's be honest here,
Speaker 1: what do you want? How do you want to approach this?
Speaker 1: And then I'm going to tell you exactly what I think,
Speaker 1: and then we go from there, and it's a bit
Speaker 1: of a sit down and come to Jesus moment and
Speaker 1: be honest with her about what I feel like her
Speaker 1: her top level is and where she can get to
Speaker 1: and not try and be like, yeah, we can win
Speaker 1: another Slam tomorrow, because that's just, you know, unlikely at
Speaker 1: this point. So what is it? What are her goals realistically,
Speaker 1: and then what can we do to work to get there?
Speaker 1: So a lot of people think, you know, it's coming
Speaker 1: in and tweaking, like, you know, if I were to
Speaker 1: work with Coco, obviously there's things that I would work
Speaker 1: on structurally in her, in her game as far as
Speaker 1: her technique is concerned. There are little things that I
Speaker 1: really believe in. But you know, because you don't need
Speaker 1: to work on Coco, what do you want? You know
Speaker 1: what Coco wants. She wants to win every single tournament.
Speaker 1: She has the ability to win every tournament in every
Speaker 1: Grand Slam, but there's a few technical things that definitely
Speaker 1: need to change, and she's working on them and she's
Speaker 1: trying to but she lost again in the first round
Speaker 1: in Doha, so there's some question marks about how coco
Speaker 1: is going right now, but anyway, all right, So that's
Speaker 1: that's how I thought It's on Emma Radakanu. I mean, listen,
Speaker 1: you've got to know how they feel before you can
Speaker 1: change a lot of things. All right, rain or Shine
Speaker 1: ninety nine, I have a few questions. Well, Rain or Shine,
Speaker 1: we can't answer them.
Speaker 3: All.
Speaker 1: Why aren't there more women coaching women? Well, we've already
Speaker 1: answered that question a few times. There's a few reasons. One,
Speaker 1: a lot of the women like, let's say myself, I
Speaker 1: can't hit the ball as well as some dude that
Speaker 1: you know is thirty years of age and can hit
Speaker 1: a ball better than me now, and so they use
Speaker 1: these cheaper guys that can hit balls with them also
Speaker 1: tell them a little bit what to do, and you know,
Speaker 1: they think that that's better, and so sometimes that's part
Speaker 1: of it. Sometimes it's women have families, don't want to
Speaker 1: travel very much, so that's that situation. And there's also
Speaker 1: the stigma attached to can a woman coach me, which
Speaker 1: is we know, horseshit. Of course they can look at
Speaker 1: Marta Kotchuk what she's been able to do over the
Speaker 1: last twelve months, just beating cocoa, goff herself this week
Speaker 1: and her coach is a female. Conchiita Martinaz has done
Speaker 1: a great job with many players through the years. Clearly,
Speaker 1: I feel like I've done a good job with everybody
Speaker 1: I've worked with.
Speaker 3: So also, it doesn't just extended tennis. Jalen Hurts has
Speaker 3: an all female management team.
Speaker 1: Come on, hell yeah, how good was that?
Speaker 3: Amazing?
Speaker 2: So not to derailium, but yes, I the reasons they're
Speaker 2: economic and logistical, hopefully not perceptionaliz.
Speaker 1: Yes, and someone else as the same question, Rayna Shane,
Speaker 1: what the best way to see archive matches besides YouTube?
Speaker 1: I don't think there's anyway.
Speaker 2: No, you know, I think we should start a letter
Speaker 2: writing campaign to HBO loose in this country because they
Speaker 2: sit on all of the archives of Wimbledon, for example,
Speaker 2: they own years and years and years of archives when
Speaker 2: they used to be the broadcast partner. They're sitting on
Speaker 2: gold mines with no real sense of how to storytell.
Speaker 2: I'm sure ESPN has a bunch of old ones. I
Speaker 2: would love, love, love for somebody in broadcast to resurrect them.
Speaker 2: It'll turn them into stuff or steal them exactly we see.
Speaker 1: Well now that yeah, a good question.
Speaker 3: Well, that's a good ood question. Yeah, I think it's
Speaker 3: I think the answer is YouTube.
Speaker 1: Caitlin would love that, all right, somebody else. Tracy also
Speaker 1: asked about the thoughts on the US Open mixed doubles.
Speaker 1: It really does. It's really a question that came up
Speaker 1: quite often from people, so I think you will know
Speaker 1: exactly how we feel about it now, el got it. No,
Speaker 1: not good.
Speaker 2: Well, I was just going to read one counterpoint to
Speaker 2: what we discussed. In the spirit of change. A friend
Speaker 2: of mine who's a tennis coach in Brooklyn said, shout
Speaker 2: out to the USCA, and he was open for making
Speaker 2: moves and switching up the mix steps. I love the
Speaker 2: changing format and I love that the change in timing.
Speaker 3: The ability to.
Speaker 2: Have men and women compete together is one of the
Speaker 2: things that makes tennis unique. It deserves participation and viewership.
Speaker 2: Happy they're resurrecting the event. I don't know if I
Speaker 2: would characterize it as a record's resurrection, but it I
Speaker 2: just want to say there are some people who are
Speaker 2: seeing this as a win because it seems like more
Speaker 2: fans and eyeballs and maybe prominent players will participate in it.
Speaker 2: If that's true, I don't know the players are about it.
Speaker 2: Sarahani is famously not having about it, so you know again,
Speaker 2: that's why I was sort of like, I have a
Speaker 2: feeling will not this will not be the last time
Speaker 2: we talked about this.
Speaker 1: I think my issue is, and I've stated already, is
Speaker 1: that to play the four is a joke.
Speaker 3: It's an exod that is stupid, indefensible.
Speaker 1: Yeah, I mean, I will say I've spoke to Sam's
Speaker 1: dooty yesterday and Sam's was like, uh, what the fuck
Speaker 1: you have to hold serve one time? Like what are
Speaker 1: we doing here? You know what I mean? I said,
Speaker 1: what you're thinking about making a comeback?
Speaker 3: You know?
Speaker 1: So yeah, I think the best of you know, the
Speaker 1: first of fourth the set being four games is just
Speaker 1: it's a it's a it's a travesty. Just make it.
Speaker 1: If you want to do the tournament the week before
Speaker 1: and have it be part of fan week and you
Speaker 1: want top singles players to play, have it been what
Speaker 1: it is, best to two sets. You've already cut it
Speaker 1: down to best of two sets and a match tiebreak.
Speaker 1: Just keep it at that for fuck's sake. It's only
Speaker 1: like an hour and fifteen minute match anyway, yeah, what
Speaker 1: are we playing. We don't have ads. You don't have
Speaker 1: ad ads, so it's like, you know, juice, next point wins,
Speaker 1: and then you're going to make it to four.
Speaker 3: Like it does feel a little teddlywink.
Speaker 1: Ish, italy winkish.
Speaker 3: There you go, tedderwinkish. That's feel free to use that.
Speaker 2: I won't use that as an episode total because we
Speaker 2: already figured it out.
Speaker 1: Yes, well. K Low On the other the other unnameless
Speaker 1: social media site, asked about sits to pass any hope
Speaker 1: question mark, that's just a real, just straight up there question.
Speaker 3: I love Tessa Pats. I will go down defending this guy.
Speaker 2: Maybe it's past the point in a return for him,
Speaker 2: but until he keeps swinging a racket, I will still
Speaker 2: root for this guy and almost every kind of I
Speaker 2: just love his game. I love his game. I love
Speaker 2: his game. I love his weird emos soul, I love
Speaker 2: his fake quotes on social media.
Speaker 3: I love the whole package.
Speaker 2: He's just a weirdo who I love and I will
Speaker 2: fight to the death.
Speaker 1: I wish he hadn't said the things that he said
Speaker 1: about certain things a couple of years ago, when he
Speaker 1: was just like basically putting women as second class citizens essentially.
Speaker 1: So I'm just like, dude, wake up. We're in the
Speaker 1: twentieth century anyway. So another question from Ellie Welch, what
Speaker 1: are your thoughts on this idea, Caitlin. She didn't say, Caitlin,
Speaker 1: but I'm saying to you that has all three surfaces.
Speaker 1: Higher sees get to choose the surface they play on.
Speaker 2: Yes, really the Pirate Slam love it the okay, well
Speaker 2: we'll play it in international waters.
Speaker 1: Yeah. Well, a lot of people on X and on
Speaker 1: Blue Sky and all that sort of stuff. One of
Speaker 1: the major questions they kept asking is was about Vukov
Speaker 1: We've already talked about, and of course about the mixed double.
Speaker 1: So those are the two biggest questions. One phil Nowinn
Speaker 1: who asked, what do you think Alex Dimanon needs to
Speaker 1: do to beat Sinner?
Speaker 2: Uh?
Speaker 1: Pray and hope Janick Sinner gets injured because he literally
Speaker 1: is playing himself. Who's better, who has bigger serve, bigger forehand,
Speaker 1: bigger backhand, just as quick, not not a quick, not
Speaker 1: a quick, but pretty quick. He basically he's playing him.
Speaker 1: It's like he's playing himself as a junior. It's like
Speaker 1: Inner the man is playing Yanick Sinner the junior so
Speaker 1: and that is no slight against him.
Speaker 3: He's a gofer golfer.
Speaker 2: Yeah, it's got fat, he's great to watch, he's entertaining,
Speaker 2: he's fast, He's got other shots, just not one Zegger weapon.
Speaker 1: Yes, Paula Castro said, what do you think of the
Speaker 1: Seeds losing today, specifically Arena and Coco, And my answer
Speaker 1: to that is, that's why I believe that Mattie keys
Speaker 1: Is made a fantastic move. And I will say I
Speaker 1: did chat to her husband Beyond after she won the
Speaker 1: Australian Open, and I'm not taking credit for this, but
Speaker 1: I did say one of the things that Sam Stows
Speaker 1: had told me after she won the US openers, she
Speaker 1: wished she hadn't gone and played in Asia right after that,
Speaker 1: because you have to be ready and prepared, as Sam
Speaker 1: said last week, to still put the work in. Just
Speaker 1: because she won the Australian Open does not guarantee you
Speaker 1: winning your next match, and so you have to be
Speaker 1: prepared to put the work in, to be mentally prepared
Speaker 1: to be out there, to be mentally prepared to be
Speaker 1: at a tournament. So I think that you know Coco's
Speaker 1: one thing. Coco probably can go there, but there's something
Speaker 1: to be said about playing a tournament of that size
Speaker 1: not long after flying back from Australia, flying to the
Speaker 1: Middle Ace. It's a lot and so I think Maddy
Speaker 1: Keys has done a really smart job with not going
Speaker 1: to the Middle Ace and that great land. That question anyway, Kitlin,
Speaker 1: is there anything more you would like to talk to
Speaker 1: our trusty fans about.
Speaker 2: I just want to give it a shout out to
Speaker 2: the Cuban national team with whom I got to train
Speaker 2: and visit this past weekend. Truly, truly, truly one of
Speaker 2: the highlights of my life to go to Havana, meet
Speaker 2: a bunch of teens, all of whom are now watsapping
Speaker 2: me and represent the most talent in the country. And
Speaker 2: the legendary coach Belle Case Rodriguez, who's who's coaching them
Speaker 2: all and who was in and o her own right,
Speaker 2: a phenomenal international player, having made several FED Cup then
Speaker 2: called fed Cup now called BJK Cup appearances for a
Speaker 2: country that not very many people have their eye on.
Speaker 3: For tennas.
Speaker 2: So just like a super super super special time, I'll
Speaker 2: be writing about it for our summer issue. And yeah,
Speaker 2: just like any of those kids who might be paying
Speaker 2: attention to thank thank for having me. It was a
Speaker 2: total total posture.
Speaker 1: Oh look at you. That is really nice to see
Speaker 1: and here anyway, Well, we love tennis, we love everything
Speaker 1: about it. I am still in Australia, as I talked about,
Speaker 1: I'm heading back to New York in a couple of days.
Speaker 1: I'm missing. Yes, I'm heading back on Saturday, so you'll
Speaker 1: see me Saturday. I'm coming back to the cold. It's
Speaker 1: just been beautiful here in Australia, and I have to say,
Speaker 1: having my head in the sand literally at Bondo Beach
Speaker 1: and away from the mess and craziness of the United
Speaker 1: States with what the f is happening back there, is
Speaker 1: just it's been a godsend, I will say. So, I'm
Speaker 1: about to get heads stuck right into all the bs
Speaker 1: that I'm going to be dealing with, and I'm glad
Speaker 1: I've got my strain passport.
Speaker 3: Still let me just say that smart move all right.
Speaker 1: On that note, we have your Canadian passport.
Speaker 3: Believe it. My whole family does.
Speaker 1: Oh look at you. So you can go up north
Speaker 1: and I can go down south, and we can just
Speaker 1: leave if we have to. Commonwealth forever, Commonwealth forever. Alright anyway,
Speaker 1: all right, well Caitlin, it's good to see you again
Speaker 1: and I'll see you back in New York.
Speaker 3: Yes, I'm everyone again.
Speaker 1: As I say all the time, Please like and subscribe,
Speaker 1: give us a good little rating. We do love you
Speaker 1: guys for listening to us every single week and appreciate
Speaker 1: this one was a little bit late, but hey, we
Speaker 1: got it done.
Speaker 2: Thanks for don Bye bye, Thanks mate. I gotta make dinner, okay,
Speaker 2: but he's out.