SamprasFanz.org

An Interview with Patrick McEnroe, August 2000 (at the Tennis Masters Series – Cincinnati ATP Tour Event)

Vince Barr: Pete just won his record-breaking 13th major at Wimbledon; in your assessment, where does that accomplishment place him in the ranks of all time great tennis players? What if he never wins the French Open?

Patrick McEnroe: “Well, he’s obviously up there no matter what he does the rest of his career. I still think he has a couple of good years left. Winning the French is going to continue to be difficult for him. I think he’s one of the greatest --- obviously --- ever to play. I put him up there with Laver, Pancho Gonzales, with Tilden, with whomever you want to put up there. It’s impossible to say if he’s the best of all time. If he wins the French, I’d probably put him there, but at this point, I think it’s unlikely.”

VB: What do you think he can do to win the French? Obviously, he’s a player who prefers quick points. On clay, you can’t play that way. In my opinion, he hasn’t gone through the “mental adjustment” to the slower surfaces and acclimated himself to playing longer points. What do you think?

PM: “Well, he’s got to be, physically, in the best shape of his life, to have any chance. I’m not sure if he has done that. In the last couple of years, whether it’s because he’s so trained himself to play quick points, like you said, to be explosive, and not to grind out points. I also think he needs to take a little bit off his serve, get a higher percentage of first serves in --- not go for as many aces --- and serve and volley, pretty much every point; certainly on his first serve. It’s difficult. The other problem is that, even if he improves and gets better, the other players are improving and getting better on clay: the specialists are getting more specialized, players are younger. A lot of tennis is about mentally believing (you can win). When players go out and play Pete on clay, they already think that they have a chance whereas if they play him at Wimbledon or if Pete is playing well on hard courts --- you know, they go out there thinking that they really don’t have a chance. On clay, a ton of players out there believe that they can beat him and that’s more than half the battle.”

VB: Given all the different surfaces on the Tour, is it realistic to expect any individual to master all of them and still be a consistent winner? Granted, Agassi has won majors on all of them but his lack of consistency, in my opinion, mitigates that accomplishment somewhat. What are your thoughts?

PM: “Oh definitely. Agassi certainly has an incredible record, but he hasn’t had the longevity that Pete’s had. Clearly, Pete goes down as a greater player in history than Agassi. Agassi has shown that he can win on every surface but he hasn’t shown that he can win year after year after year, which Pete has done six years in a row and maybe this year again, in 2000, finish number one again. So, it’s hard. Agassi’s game is more adaptable to the different surfaces. Pete’s is not as adaptable to clay. But I still think that over the years, strategically, he’s taken the wrong approach playing on clay. Whether or not that’s just because he didn’t think his body could hold up and play those long points, that may be the reason.”

VB: What do you think of the new ranking system? Do you like or hate it and would you be in favor of going to surface-specific rankings?

PM: “I think that there’s no reason to have surface-specific rankings, that’s just way too confusing. I think the Race has some problems but now that we’re 2/3rds of the way through the year, the Champion’s Race makes sense. I think it took some adjustment, obviously, you have to have a system where you can seed players properly based on what they’ve done over the last year. So you need to keep the (Tournament Entry) system as it is. But now, you look at who’s at the top: it’s Kuerten, Sampras, Norman, Agassi --- it’s players who have done the best this year. So I think that now we’re at this point, I think the Race is great and it’s going to come down to probably the U.S. Open this year (2000). If one of the guys wins it that’s won another Grand Slam --- Andre, Pete or Guga --- if they win it, then clearly they are # 1. But I think the Race now at this stage, and we knew there would be an adjustment period, it’s proving that once you get a lot of tournaments played, it makes sense.”

VB: I wanted to ask you about Davis Cup (note: this was before he was named Captain to replace his brother). One of his goals was to increase awareness of and interest in the competition. Do you feel he has succeeded?

PM: “I think he’s succeeded to some extent. He certainly has brought a lot of attention to the matches. His personality has brought a lot of that. I think that’s been great. The tennis story from Zimbabwe was on the cover of the New York Times. That has a lot to do with John being there. But from the standpoint of raising it (awareness of the competition) to a whole other level, let’s face it, Davis Cup needs to be changed, the whole structure, and he (John) knows that. He would like to try to help make that happen and he’s got enough of a voice that people listen to that it can happen. But it has to come from more than just him, it has to come from people in the whole tennis world that realize that Davis Cup is a great event and puts tennis in a great light. The players enjoy it, given the right circumstances to play in it, but you have to have the best players play. Sports nowadays is based on getting the best athletes out there and you have to cater in some sense to making it easy for those athletes to be able to play. Right now, the way it is structured, it’s just not set up that way.”

VB: You make a good point but it’s fairly evident that the International Tennis Federation isn’t really listening to the players. Some players want the Cup to be staged every two years, like the Ryder Cup in golf. Does the ITF have any inclination for changing the format?

PM: “They have an inclination to change it. There’s a lot of talk going on now about that happening. I think it has to come from the players, it has to come from the ITF. I think the ATP should be involved in some way. Let’s face it, the ATP runs the Tour, aside from the Grand Slams. They have a lot of tournaments and they need to be involved. I think everybody needs to be involved in turning the Davis Cup into a one-month event, whether it’s every year or every other year. One month of Davis Cup that dominates the tennis world. You could still have home and away matches, you can have a tournament that people can follow. You can set up marketing strategies in different cities and sell tickets and promote who’s going to be there and what country is going to be there, and have that be the only major tennis going on at that time of the year. And If that means some tournaments have to not exist maybe that year, well, that’s difficult; that’s where you run into problems. But for the good of the overall sport and for the popularity of tennis in the long run, that’s the only way to go.”

VB: What do you think of the state of American tennis? I was fairly impressed with Taylor Dent’s match against Pete Sampras. Dent gave Pete all he could handle. You’ve got guys like Andy Roddick & Mardy Fish coming up. Is American tennis as bleak as it appeared to be a few years ago?

PM: “I think there’s definitely some positives out there. Taylor Dent showed that he has a lot of ability. He matched up pretty well with Pete. Pete wasn’t at his best, obviously. But he and Andy Roddick; they’re young, they’re raw, they have ability. They have good physical tools. That’s important. Tennis is a lot more of a physical game now. You need to be quick. You need to be strong. You need to be able to withstand the pace that’s out there. I think that these guys have that. Mardy Fish is another kid. You look at the Bryans; they’ve made some strides. So there are some decent signs out there. Are they the same foursome that we had with Pete, Andre, Michael and Jim? No. But that was one in a billion, basically; to expect just a retread every ten years is hard. But I think there are some good signs and the next couple of years will give us a good read on if they will come out and be great players.”

VB: Do you think the United States Tennis Association does as good of a job as other tennis federations such as Spain and Sweden, of promoting the game to youngsters and getting them interested in it? You travel around the world. What do these countries do better than us?

PM: “Well, it’s easier for the other federations because they’re smaller and since tennis is already one of the top three sports in that country. Tennis is not at that level in this country because we have so many other sports; and sports is such a big business. It’s hard to lay all that blame (for lagging behind in developing players) at the USTA because of that. The USTA is trying to do a lot of things. They’re trying to create interest in tennis not just for kids but for people of all ages. So, certainly they can do a better job of…”

VB: Anything specific?

PM: “Well, I’ve been trying to push for getting more programs where kids can come together and play with each other, whether it be in their region that they live or (elsewhere). The players that grew up being great players essentially grew up because they had good competition around where they lived. I don’t think necessarily that going away to a tennis academy, away from home, is necessarily the best way. Yes, there have been people that have done that. But generally, people who have gone to the highest level in tennis have had it because they have been able to do it near their home. The USTA has tried to do that with the new coaches that they have in different regions. But you know, it’s difficult. These things take time. Academies have their own agenda, and parents have their own agenda. Kids have their own coaches. I just think that there has to be more of a sense of trying to bring everybody together, being on the same page. Let everyone do what they specially can do, but also realize let’s try to do it more as a group rather than as “I want my kid because he’s in my academy” or whatever it may be.”

VB: What do you think that this tournament (Cincy ATP) has to do to attract the women players like Indian Wells and the Ericsson?

PM: “Women have events going on right now in California and those tournaments want to keep the women coming to their events. So to just say that “we’ve got a great event here and we want the women” is a bit shortsighted. Yes it can happen, maybe it will happen in a couple of years.”

VB: Can the WTA restructure their calendar?

PM: “I’m sure they could but what do you tell the tournaments in San Diego, Manhattan Beach and Stanford at that point? By the way, you can’t have your tournament anymore now because we have a great tournament in Cincinnati for men? Well, they want the women at their tournament, that’s their job. That’s what they’ve been doing, that’s what they’ve been promoting. So, I think it’s possible that it could happen. Certainly, it’s a great tennis town. It’s a great event here for the men for many years. And I’m sure the women would be treated just as well as the men were and I think the fans would love it. But there’s a lot of other factors.”

VB: Last question: members of Samprasfanz also watch a lot of tennis and want to see more of it on television. How can we make that happen? We’d prefer much more live tennis on TV; get rid of the tape delay stuff in Europe and we’ll set our VCRs if we have to.

PM: (laughs) “Well, I think you have to write to ESPN, the other networks. You have to watch. The bottom line is that if not enough people are watching, there’s not going to be a reason for the networks to put on more tennis. Yes, we all love tennis, we want to see more of it on TV but we also have to get other people to watch. If the ratings aren’t up, they’re not going to make money. That’s unfortunately, the bottom line. I agree. I would rather see the matches from Davis Cup come on live at six in the morning. I think people would (watch it), tennis fans would. But there’s the catch-22. They say, well, if we have it on at noon (tape-delayed) we’ll get more people to watch. That’s what the ratings say. You might not get more of the fanatics like you and me to watch, but you might get more people just in general. But I agree. I think there should be more tennis that’s live. Watching an event that’s taped just doesn’t have the same feeling as doing it live. But you’ve got to let your voices be heard and get more people to watch.”

End of Interview

Back to Fanzone