Mailbag: Tennis’s Place in the Israel-Palestine Conflict

Before addressing several far more trivial topics, it’s worth discussing the event on everyone’s minds.

Hey everyone…

• It’s a week old now, but note that the Cincinnati event will stay in Cincinnati; an announcement that has met with great praise and relief throughout the Republic of Tennis. (Not just among us Midwest partisans.) In a perfect world, the tennis interest of Charlotte is repaid and that Queen City gets a smaller event.

• Per Craig Tiley, Rafa Nadal is (kinda sorta maybe) committed to playing the 2024 Australia Open.

• Speaking of Ohio, here’s a self-plug piece on Jim Jordan’s fitness to be House Speaker.

Onward …

---

A lot of the questions and comments this week pertained to the terror attacks in Israel and how tennis is directly and indirectly affected. I have an instinct to stick to tennis (diversion!) but I also want to be faithful to the mail and chatter. So I’ll try and incorporate as much as possible.

But I’m thinking that instead of hot takes and indignation and more division, what if we can seek out some common ground here? This is, perhaps, a futile exercise, but in the spirit of bridge-building:

• Can we all agree … this is a horrible situation that doesn’t lend itself to social media and bloviating hot takes. We are all incentivized to play deejay and blast our views out. To what end?

• Can we all agree … while we can debate whether these kinds of institutional statements are performative or meaningful (I would argue the latter), here are the public positions of the WTA and ATP, and they are both reasonable and responsible.

• Can we all agree … it’s a disguised blessing that the WTA is not holding its flagship event in Saudi Arabia later this month, as planned/hoped. While the WTA may soon announce that the Finals will be held in Saudi for 2024 to ’26, world events will not allow for the significance and symbolism of this decision to be easily minimized. 

• Can we all agree … what-aboutism and moral equivalencies are bankrupt when babies are being killed and women are being raped and people are being burned to death in their homes. When there are terrorists committed—per their own charter—to full-on extermination of a group, there is space for nothing but moral clarity and full-throated condemnation.

• But can we all agree ... we should also be able to discuss the situation as something other than good-versus-evil. (For me, this Tom Friedman essay is the best piece I’ve read over the last 10 days.) “Context” and “nuance” can be a pretext for defending the indefensible. But context and nuance can also be ways to have an understanding that is more than binary, to condemn terrorists while hoping, across the board, for dignity and self-determination and peace.

• Can we all agree … different players are under different pressures. I got a number of DMs and texts criticizing players for what they did and did not say on this issue. Players quick to weigh in on X were silent here. Players supportive of Y in one context were suddenly in support of Z. I would urge grace here.

Quick anecdote: A few years ago, a Tunisian player, Malek Jaziri, refused to play an Israeli opponent. This struck many of us as outrageous, completely antithetical to international competition. (What if a player refused to compete against a LGBTQ opponent? Or a Black opponent? What if an Indian refused to play a Pakistani? Or vice versa?) Then the ATP quietly took a few of us aside and let it be known the Jaziri may have been under duress, may have had his federation funding cut if he didn’t take this public stance, may have even been in personal danger if he departed from the company line. This also recalled the condemnation Aryna Sabalenka faced earlier this year for declining to repudiate Belarus and the country’s objectionable, awful autocrat, Alexander Lukashenko. It was a stark reminder that this this is a global sport—encompassing all sorts of governments and political system and cultures—and the public doesn’t always know pressures players face.

• Can we all agree … tennis may seem especially trivial in the face of terror and brutality. But there is a role the sport can be playing. Here is an enterprise with constituents from all over the world that manages to go about its business with an undercurrent of respect. There are Russians and Ukrainians … and they state their positions and decline to shake hands. There are disagreements about the looming role of Saudi Arabia … and they are debated. There are players all over the political spectrum who don’t always agree … and they argue in private. There is huge income inequality … and the 1% has taken affirmative steps to rebalance prize more equitably. It’s hardly a perfect sphere, this sport. Tennis may provide a (small) measure of comfort. And even hope.

• Tennis’s various stakeholders gathered recently in London and via Zoom to discuss a united strategy. The WTA and ATP will not “merge” per se, as this implies equal value. There will be no “takeover” or “acquisition,” either, as this implies superiority and inferiority. Rather, the ATP and WTA discussed an “aggregation agreement” whereby they go to the market as one. And “the market” is basically (a) gambling operators who will pay for data and eventually streaming rights and (b) Saudi Arabia.

In the cases of both sports gambling and Saudi Arabia, there are loud pro and con voices. The case for engagement is quite similar: There’s a lot of money here, and everyone else is doing it, so if we resist market forces or take a stance on principle, someone else will take our share. Different people have different moral thresholds. (Even Chris/Martina and Billie Jean King have expressed different sentiments.) But at some point, the tours need to acknowledge the risks here. Just as tethering your sport to gambling is not your conventional sponsorship, entering a sweeping deal with an authoritarian country with a deeply problematic human rights record brings complexities and moral compromises. The WTA learned this the hard way with regards to China, badly misplaying its hand. Arguing that sports and politics don’t mix resides somewhere between “disingenuous” and “bad faith.” Arguing that sports and politics necessarily intersect—and one can be used to improve the other—ought to be the starting point.

Onward with less gravitas …

---

Shelton reached the quarterfinals of the Shanghai Open to follow up on his run to the semifinals of the U.S. Open :: Andy Wong/AP

As we speak, Shelton beat Sinner for the best win by a young American male player in years. Which brings me to this—can you think of any player whose star has risen faster than Shelton’s since the beginning of the hard court season? On the flip side, whose star has fallen the most—Rune or Tsitsipas?

VK

• After noting that Ben Shelton lost to Sebastian Korda 7–6 in the third set after beating Jannik Sinner 7–6 in the third in Shanghai … yes, your question is a good one. What a strange 18 months or so. He wins the NCAA title at Florida and proceeds to turn pro. He scores a top-10 win at Cincy 2022 (d. Casper Ruud) and pierces the public consciousness. Still deep outside the top 100, he spends the last quarters of ’22 playing the Challengers, winning three titles to close out the year. He keeps it going in Australia—the first time he uses his passport he reaches Week 2 in Oz and emerges with a top-50 ranking. Then he goes six months without back-to-back tour-level wins. Then he reached the semis of the U.S. Open. And he is now a top-20 player … despite a sub-.500 record for ’23.

This should be such a source of optimism. Yes, it’s been a rapid rise, as the reader correctly notes. But it hasn’t been linear. Imagine Shelton’s ceiling here. He is a top-20 player today … without fully mastering clay, point construction or the rigors of the road. Get in before the real IPO.

As for the flip side … Holger Rune has simply hit a wall. There is a finite amount of top-tier tennis even the stars can play. Rune is clearly cooked. I would submit that Stefanos Tsitsipas is far more of a concern.

Is pickleball to tennis what slap fighting is to MMA? I may be wrong but I can’t muster interest in either of these newcomers.

Kevin Kane, Kingston, Ontario, Canada

• As Austin Powers used to say, “Oh, behave.” Do the kids still quote Austin Powers? No? Didn’t think so. Pickleball is to tennis what pitch-and-putt is to golf. It’s not the real thing. It’s not the Big Kid product. But it’s not demonic. At best, it’s a fun complement, easier to master for kids and seniors. At worst, it’s an innocuous picnic game. No need for the hate. I say it again: Tennis should view pickleball as an onboard or an offboard, not as a nemesis. Hey, you like mopeds? Awesome. When you’re done tooling around, try this bike with even more horsepower. We call it a motorcycle.

MMA is my guilty pleasure. I like it for many of the reasons I like tennis. (One-on-one sports hit different—quoting the kids again—from team sports.) But slap-fighting, with its absence of defense, is, well, indefensible. Not just morally bankrupt but dangerous. If you’re interested, here’s a piece I wrote earlier this year making that point.

Jon, So Ana Ivanovic and Carlos Moya in the Hall of Fame? I'm sure they are nice people, but the bar seems very low.

Duane W.

• To clarify, the statement the Hall of Fame put out last week pertains to the fan vote only. And Leander Paes finished first ahead of Ivanovic and Moya. (Far outpacing Vivek Ramaswamy and Doug Burgum.)

This is the old conundrum re: the Hall of Fame. Do we want truly elite, generational players? Are we willing to go a year without any inductees (and thus no revenue-generating event)? Are we willing to deny precedent and suddenly demand higher standards after years of admitting players with only one major to their credit? Do we have a singles-to-doubles conversion chart? Are we prepared for what happens when Newport loses its ATP event that has long been concurrent with the enshrinement?

I saw REM when I was in college and Michael Stipe intro’d “Shiny Happy People” with “This is the dumbest song ever written!”

Scott R., New Jersey

• In keeping with middle-aged man theme … I always got such a kick out of the album, Out of Time. It’s an all-timer. This is barely a matter of taste. Objectively, it soars. It’s in the ice cream/pizza/Coco Gauff/Pat Rafter category of “If you don’t like it, there’s something wrong with you.” Then smack in the middle, there’s this absolute godawful song (with the great Kate Pierson, no less!) so jarringly out of place. It’s like you have sushi, burrata, lamb meatballs, Flats Fix burritos, dog food paella, lobster rolls, ramen, chicken tikka, and ropa vieja.

I stand by the larger analogy from last week. It’s O.K., healthy even, to have a fond, even fawning, opinion of an athlete … and leave open the possibility that not every bit of output is unconditionally winning.

Re: the question last week about Peng Shuai protests, Alizé Cornet did refuse to play in China.

• Tennis will miss Alizé Cornet more than it (or she) realizes.

Shots

• USTA chief executive, professional tennis and U.S. Open tournament director Stacey Allaster was honored with the Billie Jean King Leadership Award at last week’s Women’s Sports Foundation Annual Salute to Women in Sports.

In partnership with the Billie Jean King Leadership Initiative, the Billie Jean King Leadership Award, presented by Darcie Glazer Kassewitz and the Tampa Bay Buccaneers Foundation, recognizes an individual or group that demonstrates outstanding leadership and makes significant contributions to the advancement of women through achievements in sport and the workplace.

• The ATX Open has announced two-time major champion Victoria Azarenka has committed to play the 2024 tournament at Austin’s Westwood Country Club. She joins former U.S. Open champion Sloane Stephens in committing to play the Hologic WTA Tour event from Feb. 24 to March 3, 2024.