Back to the Grind

Back to the Grind

Back to the Grind

Kei Nishikori has been reanimated.

Kei Nishikori has been reanimated.

By Giri Nathan
October 4, 2024

Kei turning back the clock in Tokyo. // Getty

Kei turning back the clock in Tokyo. // Getty

If you could steal one ATP player’s backhand, whose would you pick? Feels somehow irresponsible not to go with Novak Djokovic. But I could see a case for a Jannik Sinner, maybe even a Daniil Medvedev, depending on your taste. My tastes here tend toward the simple and outdated. After all these years, I’d pick the 34-year-old, not-quite-dead Kei Nishikori. That backhand is a minimalist’s dream. The racquet dips down unceremoniously, it comes up smoothly, and in between, all it does is make pure contact with the ball. The wrists are lax, and the timing is anything but. Some backhands might be more devastating, but none are quite so simple.

There weren’t many occasions to watch that wonderful backhand over the past three years, as the Japanese star had a series of injuries and slid deeper into his 30s. This wasn’t a new story for him. Throughout Nishikori’s career, even in his prime, his woes were often physical. Not just acute injuries, but also the mid-tournament wear and tear. He’d play a few unfocused matches in the early week of a major, play out an unnecessary five-setter here and there, and look utterly depleted by the time he faced his Big Three executioner in the second week. On a purely technical level, though, he left little to be desired. With a short-guy serve that was never going to win him many easy points, he would always have to seize initiative from the baseline; his career would only go as far as his speed, return game, and killer ground strokes would take him. Which was quite far: the No. 4 ranking, 12 titles, wins over all the best players of his era, a major final at the 2014 US Open.

But given his medical rap sheet, Nishikori would not have been an obvious candidate for career longevity. As he sat on the sidelines through the entirety of 2022 after hip surgery, then proceeded to miss much of 2023 and lost all his ranking points, I half-expected the next news update from him to be a quiet retirement announcement. But he resurfaced, won a Challenger, and kept some hope alive. In 2024, he cropped up here and there. At Roland-Garros this year I settled into a good seat for his unlikely return to the Grand Slams, his first since the US Open in 2021. And I felt the warm fuzzy embrace of a familiar tennis scene. A physically gutting, five-set Kei Nishikori victory after winning the first two sets? The man hadn’t changed at all.

It’s always hard to assess how much a tennis player has left to give; an isolated good match is one thing, but consistency is the true elusive goal. There have been some interesting moments for Nishikori this summer, but as far as the eye test is concerned, it was last week in Tokyo, in front of the loud home crowd, where he began to look like a real player again. He received a wild card and delivered value.

The tournament opened up on an unusual note for him. After getting used to facing young and unfamiliar players, he found it strange and nostalgic to face his contemporary, Marin Cilic, who was on a (very successful) injury comeback tour of his own, having just won an ATP 250. And so it was the two finalists from the US Open exactly a decade ago, healed from their various maladies, still going at it. Nishikori’s serve, of all shots, helped carry him to that three-set victory. He said it was the best he’d served since his return to tour, and told the tennis writer Aki Uchida that he’d been improving his takeback and ball toss. Even the veterans are still tinkering, always in search of a new edge.

In the second round, Nishikori played Jordan Thompson, who was in good form himself, fresh off a fourth round at the US Open. And the Japanese star was reeling off winners with an ease and audacity I found almost unrecognizable. Even Nishikori later admitted surprise at his own level: “It went a little beyond my imagination. There were quite a few shots that made me think, ‘Was this going in?’” But he remained cautious. It wasn’t a meaningful sign unless he could actually keep up this level, he said.

Which he did, for another match. Nishikori’s next match in Tokyo was a barn burner against Holger Rune, the 21-year-old who is a natural with both backhands and trolling, and who seemed to relish the opportunity to taunt a stadium roaring for its local hero, howling at them and pointing to his ear. Tremendous atmosphere, even better tennis, and Nishikori fought all the way to a match point in the third set before losing. When the match ended, he set his hands on his knees, as if unable to make his way to the net. Zooming out for a bit, though, it’s hard to see this as anything but a triumph. Back from injury and unranked irrelevance, Nishikori had just played three high-level matches in a row against elite competition, and more to the point, he was hitting the ball as cleanly as he’d done at his peak. I wasn’t sure he’d ever do that again before hanging up the racquets. He kept the momentum this week in Shanghai, beating world No. 38 Mariano Navone before losing on Friday to Stefanos Tsitsipas, whom Nishikori had previously upset this summer. It’s the sort of run that can get even a sober-minded fan talking themselves into a comeback.



The Hopper

—CLAY Tennis on Beatriz Haddad Maia’s US Open run.

—Giri on Iga Swiatek’s loss to Jess Pegula.

—Jon Wertheim’s mailbag is full this week.

—Sara Errani and Andrea Vavasori have won the US Open mixed doubles.

—Tim Newcomb on Taylor Fritz and Asics.



PURE, ORIGINAL TENNIS — SIGN UP!


Searching for Craig Cignarelli

Searching for Craig Cignarelli

Searching for Craig Cignarelli

The Menendez trial cast an emotional shadow over a charismatic coach.

The Menendez trial cast an emotional shadow over a charismatic coach.

By Jackson Frons
Photo Illustration by Dakari Akil

 

Featured in Volume 1 of OPEN Tennis — BUY

Searching for Craig Cignarelli

Searching for Craig Cignarelli

The Menendez trial cast an emotional shadow over a charismatic coach.

The Menendez trial cast an emotional shadow over a charismatic coach.

By Jackson Frons
Photo Illustration by Dakari Akil

Featured in Volume 1 of OPEN Tennis — BUY

When I was 19, I beat John McEnroe in a set of doubles. Unsurprisingly, this was the highlight of my first summer home from college. It was 2013, and I spent my mornings driving from Encino to Malibu, first on the 101 to Calabasas, then westward through the canyons toward the California coast. That summer I trained for countless hours on the pristine courts at the Malibu Racquet Club, honing my game under the tutelage of Craig Cignarelli.

Craig was one of a handful of powerhouse coaches on the SoCal tennis scene. The sort of figure with a perpetually full lesson book and an almost cultish following. He was an ample man, California tan, with a round face, bulbous calves, and a stocky upper body. He kept his golden blond hair coiffed in center-parted waves. He’d made his name teaching around the valley in the ’90s, first at the Warner Center then on the courts of Cal State Northridge. After that, he replaced Robert Landsdorp at the Riviera, where he ran the junior program and boasted a list of clients that ranged from touring pros to Elisabeth Shue. One of those pros, Lester Cook, was working with him that summer in Malibu, fresh off a commendable, if not particularly lucrative, career on the Challenger circuit.

Craig and Lester’s Malibu workouts featured a rotating cast of college guys and recent high school grads. People who played for or were soon headed to schools like Pepperdine, Duke, Wake Forest, and UCLA. I didn’t entirely fit in. I was gangly and athletically uninspired. I spent a lot of time staring at my phone. I’d had an up-and-down first season at a small Division III school in rural Vermont and could see the end of my tennis career looming in the not-so-distant future. Off court, I was reading Jesus’ Son and Actual Air, and at night, sore and sunburned, I hung out in the Westwood backyard of my friend’s film-producer father with a cadre of hip liberal arts students who’d long ago given up any involvement with organized sports.

While I’d known many of my training partners in Malibu from our years on the junior circuit, I suddenly felt apart and distant from the tennis world. It was clear that our games (and lives) were trending toward different destinations.

They were long days. We’d hit for hours in the morning. Get Chipotle. Watch Wimbledon on the pro-shop flat-screen. Practice more in the afternoon. Work out in the gym.

It was a common routine with uncommon adornments. Of course there was McEnroe, who waltzed in to get ready for World Team Tennis with some Dunlops and a zip-up hoodie. Another week, Paul Annacone, the ex-coach of Pete Sampras and Roger Federer (and himself an accomplished pro), came as Craig’s guest to bestow his sage wisdom upon us. Annacone eyed me, exhausted, and said, “You really should move your feet more.” Then there was the club itself, a small but elegantly modern facility just off the PCH that no one present would let you forget was owned by Larry Ellison.

I grew up practicing at a much drabber club nominally in Bel-Air, but really on an anonymous stretch of Sepulveda between the Skirball Center and the Getty Center. My coach there, himself a guru with a full lesson book, didn’t possess Cignarelli’s magnetic charisma, cultish following, or glitzy connections. He was gaunt, a bit vulgar, and regularly ducked behind the court to vomit because of an esophageal condition.

Craig was a large part of why I endured the drive, the work, the hours, and the cost (though it was admittedly my parents footing the bill) to practice a sport I increasingly disdained, in a part of town I found annoying.

_________

In Malibu, Craig wore cotton T-shirts and fed balls at an astounding pace with his dilapidated Head Instinct. He possessed a careening and ingratiating mystique and a keen understanding that, in the business of coaching tennis, volume pays the bills. On our breaks, he told stories about Lester battling John Isner and did bits about coaching the kids of celebrities. He was relentlessly smiling, engaged, active, and prepared.

I hadn’t been on court with Craig before that summer in Malibu, but I had known him for years. We met during his tenure at the Riviera when I was in middle school. That was also when I first heard whispers about his place in the violent lore of rich Los Angeles.

That’s to say, while I did improve my game that summer, my interest in the Malibu workouts wasn’t entirely about tennis. I was, consciously or not, beginning the clumsy and careless exhibition undertaken by many privileged and selfish young writers and navigating myself toward experiences that I hoped to one day spin into material.

It’s an impulse Cignarelli might understand. He’s a writer himself. Although his publicly available output consists mostly of articles about tennis, his passions lie in more creative projects. He currently has “four or five different ones in the can,” but he’s yet to pursue publication. He’s “still waiting, we’ll see.”

As a teenager, Cignarelli also wrote a handful of scripts with his friend Erik Menendez. Menendez’s name might be a familiar one to some. He made national headlines for the parental double homicide he committed with his brother Lyle in 1989. Both brothers are currently serving life sentences.

When I Facebook messaged Cignarelli about my intention to write this piece, he asked, before agreeing to an interview, “What type of details would you want? Is it 100% tennis related or are you looking for ancillary topics about your subjects. I am happy to talk tennis all day but personal stuff and extracurriculars don’t interest me.” I told Craig I wanted to learn more about his career in tennis, but also to get a sense of him as a person. I assured him, though, I had no intention of digging into his private life.

On a Zoom call in April, he appeared smiling and in repose on my computer screen, nestled on a sofa in the corner of what looked to be the sunporch of his home outside Charleston, South Carolina. Behind him was a natural sprawl—lush trees and rolling grass. “I’m here with two dogs and a cat,” he told me. His wife and daughter were out of town. It was the first time I’d seen him in more than a decade.

We talked mostly about tennis—his coaching journey, his philosophies, his decision to leave California, and the academy he’s run for the past few years in Mount Pleasant—but we also touched on Craig’s creative and intellectual interests, too. Regardless of the subject, Cignarelli managed the conversation with a writerly control. He eschewed details and dates and, for the most part, steered clear of personal matters.

Craig is a composed and commanding speaker. He’s given quite a few tennis talks over the years, and even done a TEDx presentation. His style is practiced and inflected with bits of mindset jargon—he’s a self-identified “knowledge seeker” who’s given a presentation called “The Long Walk to Excellence” that begins with a glowing reference to manifest destiny. But beneath Craig’s ingratiating charm is an evasive generality. It’s a challenge to pin him down in time or to get the name of a character. He frequently seems to be concealing something, but it’s not clear what or why. When he does tell stories, they reverberate with an allegorical vagueness.

In one, an account of his most memorable coaching experience, a man with terminal lung cancer comes to Craig for a lesson. He used to play as a kid and wanted, at the end of his life, to take up tennis again. “I put him on the baseline,” Craig said. “And he hit the ball about four feet. He just didn’t have any strength…. There was nothing left. He didn’t know how long he had to live. But we worked for a month, almost every day, and after a month he was able to hit the ball over the net and he dropped to his knees and put his arms up in the air and said thank you. About a week later he passed away…. It brings a tear to my eye.”

There are other times, though, when Cignarelli can be far more spontaneous and revealing. During a 2018 Q&A at the USPTA Summer Conference, a member of the audience asked how he got into coaching. Craig smiled and shook his head. “It’s kind of a strange story. When I was 19 years old I was a witness in a really, really famous murder case in California…. My only skill was as a tennis player; to pay that legal bill, I started teaching lessons.”

Coaching tennis isn’t easy work. Although the phrase “tennis coach” might conjure images of doe-eyed morons who lackadaisically feed balls and drone platitudes, in practice the job is often thankless and physically taxing. Coaching elite players is even more daunting. You need to not only be well-versed in the finer (and ever-changing) technical and strategic aspects of the game, but you also have to get those ideas to stick in the skulls of highly competitive, often arrogant, and frequently dim teenagers. That’s before you consider the looming stage parents and the inherently fickle whims of junior tennis players, particularly in a hotbed like Southern California. Hyped coaches and academies come and go like the breeze. Whoever has the new hot thing, the best gaggle of stars, the flashy name, can attract the hoards like moths to a light. Staying near the top of the mountain for more than a generation or two is no easy feat.

_________

Craig Cignarelli is a great tennis coach. That, on its own, is a very impressive accomplishment. It’s also not a position Craig backed into. Unlike many touted junior development wizards, he doesn’t have a name to trade on in the tennis world. He wasn’t a pro. He didn’t make a splash in the juniors. The honor of All-American was never bestowed upon him. He didn’t even play on his college team. The closest thing to a hallmark achievement on Cignarelli’s tennis résumé is a stint as the captain at Calabasas High School.

In his own estimation, Craig was “very average…. I knew nothing…had very little formal training. I had a huge forehand and not much else.”

On our Zoom, Cignarelli confirmed that he started coaching at 19, although he left out the murder-trial part. It was a summer gig at the Warner Center in Woodland Hills, a blustery and dusty tennis complex located on the sixth-story roof of the parking structure of a middling business park. It’s a place I played quite a few tournaments growing up, and I can say firsthand it’s a far cry from the luxe digs of Malibu and the Riviera.

As the story goes (both to me and in the talk for the USPTA), at some point in Craig’s tenure at the Warner Center, he began to work with a girl who showed significant promise. She is never named.

“As she succeeded,” he told me, “I realized I didn’t have the coaching or intellectual tools to stay ahead of her.”

Cignarelli doesn’t enjoy being on his back foot. At a different point in our call, he remarked, “If I don’t know something, I deep-dive into it. I don’t want to be in that position of not knowing…. That manifested in things like going to the French Open a day early to make sure I knew where the practice courts were…where is everything. I didn’t want to feel foolish in front of my player or myself.”

Over the next few years, Craig assembled an impressive “roster of gurus” to learn from. He befriended Eliot Teltscher, he brought his student to Robert Landsdorp for ground strokes and Pete Fischer (pre-arrest for child molestation) for serving lessons.

He sought out guidance from Jose Higueras, Paul Annacone, Pancho Segura, and footwork master Henry Hines.

“I sat there as a sponge…. Number one so I can help her, number two so I can broaden my horizons as a coach.”

The quality of these mentors is as much a testament to Craig’s commitment to the craft as it is to his talent with people. The latter of which is, I think, his greatest gift as a coach.

About his early success, Craig noted, “I had this charisma…. I had a big personality and was loud on the court. A lot of kids gravitated to that kind of program.”

_________

Unlike many charmers, Cignarelli isn’t all bluster. Beneath his warmth, he possesses a calculating and analytical ambition. There’s a duality to Cignarelli I’ve yet to fully reconcile. He’s a boisterous coach who loves to schmooze, but he also goes home and writes, plays chess, and reads Tolstoy, Dostoyevsky, and David Foster Wallace. He has an astounding attention to detail and an obsession with preparation and routine, yet his recollections of the past are often misty and shrouded in contradictions.

On the tennis court, Cignarelli relies on concrete and definable terms. At the Riviera, he conceived the Grips Program, a concept he pitched and sold nationally. It was basically karate belts but for tennis. The system had players ascend levels by completing a series of output-based skill exams, for example hitting a certain number of forehands out of 10 crosscourt within a certain boundary. These concepts were then deepened and made more challenging by adding stipulations like the ball still needs to be rising as it strikes the back fence. While no junior player ever completed the “black grip” exam to ascend to the program’s highest level, Mats Wilander, on a visit to the club, completed the comprehensive tennis skill assessment with ease. The Grips Program never quite took off.

Craig’s approach, in the early days, was a bit smaller-scale.

“I did my own due diligence,” he said. “I started watching matches and putting dots on a piece of paper where the ball landed. I began to see patterns coming out.”

_________

The timeline during this stage of Craig’s teaching career gets a bit murky. I’m not sure when a lot of this stuff happened, and he isn’t either. I don’t know when the anonymous promising student took her first lesson with him at the Warner Center. I don’t know when he began his quest for tennis knowledge or when he first saw the patterns emerging on the page. I’m also not even sure Craig was 19 when he began coaching. The murder that necessitated the aforementioned trial didn’t even take place until deep into the summer of 1989, meaning Craig either began teaching for reasons entirely unrelated to the trial, or it wasn’t summer, or he wasn’t 19.

None of these details are incredibly important, and I think the fogginess of Craig’s recollection is particularly forgivable because, between August 1989 and March 1996, he had a lot going on.

During his tenure as captain of the Calabasas High tennis team, sometime in late 1987 or early 1988, Craig befriended Erik Menendez. They had a lot in common. Menendez had just come west from New Jersey after his father, Jose, took a job at Live Entertainment. Craig made a similar move with his parents as a 10-year-old. They both possessed big personalities, active minds, creative impulses, vast imaginations, and a love of chess. They hit at the tennis club in Calabasas and knew a pro there named Doug Doss. Doss is of no importance to this story other than the fact that, years later, he became the director of tennis at my drab hilltop club with the coach who vomited. Patterns everywhere.

In the same canyons I drove between Calabasas and Malibu, Craig and Erik cruised at night, parking at overlooks off the Mulholland Highway so they could gaze at the ocean and the glittering valley sprawl. They liked to talk about the future. Their aspirations were ambitious if a bit amorphous. Cignarelli said during his testimony that they wanted to “start a company that was multifaceted that dealt in inventions.” He paused. “And screenwriting.” When pressed to clarify further, he added it would be a “corporation.” One that dealt in “stocks, inventions, corporate takeovers. Anything we could do to develop our status in society.” Cignarelli also contemplated a political career, along with “having a side hobby writing law screenplays and definitely going to law school.” He ultimately wished to be a senator.

These dreams were both erased and memorialized in court depositions after Erik Menendez and his older brother Lyle murdered their parents, Jose and Kitty, on Aug. 20, 1989, not long after Erik returned from playing the Boys’ 18 and Under National Championships in Kalamazoo, Michigan. Some weeks later, standing in the foyer of the family’s Beverly Hills home, the same home where the killings occurred, Erik confessed to Craig.

_________

I don’t intend to do any criminal sleuthing. It was a famous case at the time and one that’s been narrativized and re-documented ad nauseam. I’m far from a court reporter, and I’m not a fan of the lurid voyeurism of true crime. However, the case has reentered the public consciousness of late.

Last year, the brothers filed for a retrial, claiming the murders occurred in self-defense, the result of a lifetime of verbal, emotional, physical, and sexual abuse at the hands of their father. While Jose’s sexual abuse of Erik was a key piece of the defense team’s case at the trial, the murders have, more often than not, been framed as an act of greed perpetrated by two spoiled and out-of-control young adults after a fat inheritance. New evidence has further corroborated the brothers’ claims and reframed the story.

Roy Rosselló, a former member of the boy band Menudo, with whom Jose Menendez worked during his time at RCA Records, revealed that when he was 14, the elder Menendez drugged and raped him. These revelations were the focus of a three-part Peacock docuseries, Menendez + Menudo: Boys Betrayed. This year, the case was the subject of an episode of48 Hours titled “The Menendez Brothers’ Fight for Freedom” that first aired on March 3. Finally, the forthcoming second season of Netflix’s Monsters will narrativize the murders, with Javier Bardem and Chloë Sevigny cast as Jose and Kitty Menendez. Charlie Hall, the son of Julia Louis-Dreyfus, will take up the role of Cignarelli.

I would guess these are the extracurriculars Craig didn’t want taking over the narrative of this piece. I can understand why. I’m sure the murders and the trial cast an emotional shadow over large portions of his life, and they continue to cast a very literal shadow over his Google search results. However, as a journalist (and a hound for material), I would be remiss not to mention them. While Craig is often reduced to a footnote in the Menendez saga or recognized for his coaching prowess, these two parts of his character are rarely, if ever, reconciled. I would also add I haven’t gone digging into Cignarelli’s private life; all of this is alarmingly public.

Online, it’s not hard to find a ravenous and active community of Menendez enthusiasts still picking apart the trial and the murders. Cignarelli is a regular topic of conversation. To many of these weirdos, Craig is a villain who “betrayed Erik.” These people seem to mostly be para-social freaks who’ve over-empathized with two guys who killed their parents. Certainly, Jose Menendez was a monster, but that also isn’t Craig’s fault.

It is also true that there’s a natural human impulse to speculate on this kind of thing—to find the patterns—particularly because the case contains so many alluring and absurd details. For example, Craig and Erik coauthored a script that opens with a son killing his parents to inherit an insurance payout.

It’s a matter Craig described like this to ABC News in 2017: “I remember talking about the opening scene…. ‘We need to establish a crime. We need to have the protagonist gain an inheritance so he can actually fulfill his dream of creating this hunting ground for humans.’”

At the trial, Craig made a striking impression. He was young and handsome then. Thinner than he is now and outfitted in a suit jacket with gold buttons. Multifaceted conglomerates and political aspirations aside, he had an arrogant streak, a defiant smirk, and more than a few glib answers. During the cross-examination, he also bungled some dates, and his memory frequently got foggy. He also conducted himself memorably off the stand. Writing in the October 1993 edition of Vanity Fair, Dominick Dunne remarked, “On the two days Craig Cignarelli testified in court, he showed up with two young, pretty girls in miniskirts, who giggled a lot.”

Being a pompous dumbass at 19, however, is far from a crime. If it were, I’d be guilty too. His fate in all this is a small tragedy in a much bigger tragedy.

_________

The six-year trial material disrupted a formative time in Craig’s life. It paused his education and thrust him into the public eye. There’s also the emotional mess of your best friend committing a wildly violent double homicide, abuse or not. His course was redirected by the actions of another person he had no control over.

In his 2017 interview with ABC, Craig spoke openly and candidly about the strange catharsis of the trial ending: “Honestly, when the second jury came back with a guilty verdict, there was a part of me which just said, ‘I’m done. It’s finally over.’ And it felt like there was this sense of relief, followed by this really strange feeling of sadness. Like, wow, it’s finally closed, and I actually have just lost my best friend for life. He’s going to be sitting in a jail cell for the next 50 years.”

Whatever you think of him, there’s nothing fair about that. I wonder what Craig’s life might look like if the murders never took place. While I’m not sure he’d be running a multinational inventions and screenwriting firm while also serving in the Senate, it’s the necessity of asking the question that casts a glum cloud over what he has accomplished.

I’ve coached tennis before and, like writing, it is a consumptive task. Standing in the sun while yelling isn’t a bad way to escape yourself. At his peak, Craig taught 12- and 13-hour days.

Coaching tennis is a human endeavor, too. As Craig puts it, “an act of service.” You meet people where they are, attuning the lesson to their physical, mental, and emotional states. But it is also a defined and bounded relationship. There are confines to the court, the lesson begins and ends, and there are the walls between the teacher and the students, too. “My role is to stay positive, to teach, to mentor…. Then there’s that line. Because you don’t want to play the role of a parent, but you want to play the role of someone the kids can trust.” In the same way these professional relationships are delineated, Craig imposes a similar separation upon himself.

“When the door closes on the gate to the facility and I get back into my own personal mode, which is a little more introverted…I want to read books…play chess. The things that I enjoy are a little more intellectually challenging. And I try to find those intellectual challenges on the court. But I think for me it’s a quieter life at home, and the person that comes out on the court is because I had to create this character…this figure…who’s someone who’s going to be charismatic and pulling you forward. I think as a person I get my charge from that and my rest time at home.”

While I do understand the sentiment here—we are all, in our various ways, performing ourselves in the world—these boundaries between the personal and the professional can’t be so easily delineated. A lawyer doesn’t transmute into a different person when she arrives at the courtroom. A tennis coach’s soul doesn’t alter when he latches the gate and rolls his basket to the service line. I don’t stop being me when I sit down to write. It’s all personal and it all isn’t. It’s all the character and it’s all you.

On the page, the writer is the one in control. It’s a fixed space. One with limits. It’s a place to figure things out. While Craig never brought up Erik Menendez to me, he did bring up one of his past writing projects that caused me, immediately, to think of his former friend. Cignarelli described it as, “Young Dexter goes to Hogwarts. A school for serial killers who train to kill serial killers.”

Adolescent monsters killing older, bigger monsters.

_________

Craig left California around 2015, making a stop in Atlanta before settling in South Carolina. He told me the taxes got too high. The traffic was getting worse. He saw “decay happening,” but I wonder if a fresh start in the South appealed for other reasons, too. Memories can ghost a landscape. He seems to like his new life more.

“The tennis in California is very much like the culture of the city. It’s first strike, what can I get from you, how big is your wallet, what do you drive, what can I take from you? Are you a producer? Can I do a film?… I’d had enough celebrity, Lamborghinis, and Ferraris.”

It’s different where he is now, and he’s different too.

“Out here you feel like someone wants to give you a hug and invite you into the house. I feel like I had to take some of my guard down to settle in out here. I can finally breathe a little.”

The move has also changed his approach both as a coach and as a writer.

“I think the biggest growth for me has been understanding how much it really is the impact you have on the human being, as opposed to their successes on the court…. For me the thing that changed the most was that at first I was thinking, ‘How good can I make players?’ It was very ego-driven. Now it’s about, does this kid have life skills?… Did we give them solutions so they can face any problem that comes up?”

On the page, the pulp and violence have been replaced with far more heartwarming material. One of his more recent projects is a series of “about 150 chronicles” that he wrote for his daughter as she was growing up. “Three to four paragraphs a day… I compared her first steps to Neil Armstrong walking on the moon.”

Although Cignarelli seems at peace with his family and his pets, he still withholds, intentionally or not. Some of the guard is still up, but maybe that’s just because I was there on the other screen looking for a quote, some shape, a detail that might unlock him and give his life a deeper meaning.

There was one moment, near the end of our call, when that happened.

“I’ll give you a quick one story,” Cignarelli said. It was a final strange allegory. This one had nothing to do with tennis, although I wonder who the nameless guy was.

It goes like this:

“I flew back on a flight from Sacramento one time, and I was with a guy and he invited me to breakfast a couple days later. And we went up to a tower where the mayor was having breakfast and a bunch of other people were sitting in there. I was 18 years old. I’d come there in a suit for one of the first times in my life. And we all sit down and have breakfast and I pull out cash to pay for the check, and the guy just kind of taps my head and said, ‘We don’t do cash here.’ And I felt so naive. It was such a brutal feeling to not know how to function in these surroundings, and I think that inspired me to make sure that I’m always aware of how things work. Because I don’t ever want that feeling again.”

TENNIS. ART. CULTURE. FASHION. TRAVEL. IDEAS. — SIGN UP


Identity Crisis

Identity Crisis

Identity Crisis

The Laver Cup runneth empty.

The Laver Cup runneth empty.

By Klaus Bellstedt
September 22, 2024

As Roger Federer leaves the Laver Cup stage, Carlos Alcaraz is cast as its new Superman. // Clive Brunskill, Getty

As Roger Federer leaves the Laver Cup stage, Carlos Alcaraz is cast as its new Superman. // Clive Brunskill, Getty

There was a big tennis party last week. Novak Djokovic and Grigor Dimitrov took center stage. The two really put on an impressive show for 12,000 fans in Sofia. The tennis was good. And afterward they both danced shirtless on the court.

Dimitrov and Djokovic are good buddies. “Grigor is my Bulgarian brother. And if he invites me to a match as part of his foundation work, I will of course come,” said Djokovic before the exhibition match. On the evening of the match against Djokovic, Dimitrov learned that he would soon be back on court as the replacement for Rafael Nadal, who was still unable to compete. Dimitrov then boarded the plane and made his way to Berlin for the Laver Cup, where six players from Europe compete against six players from a “world” selection in team competition.

The Laver Cup is intended as a tribute to the icons of men’s tennis, to Rod Laver, the namesake, to Björn Borg and John McEnroe, the captains. At the same time, it should bring together the best of the present and the faces of the future of the sport. This has been Roger Federer’s vision since he launched the continental competition in 2017 with his manager Tony Godsick.

Dimitrov sat a little lost on a large sofa behind the players’ bench on Friday, the first day of the Laver Cup in Berlin. Together with his teammate from Team Europe, he watched the first match of the day between Francisco Cerundolo and Casper Ruud. The format allows team members to be interviewed during the match. Dimitrov was not interviewed. Daniil Medvedev and local hero Alexander Zverev spoke into the cameras for Europe. The two don’t like each other very much, to put it mildly. They are now teammates for three days.

The Laver Cup is a strange entity. Even in its seventh edition, its identity has not been clarified. On Friday, shortly before the first singles match, Tony Godsick held a press conference with Laver Cup CEO Steve Zacks and captains McEnroe and Borg. As always at such events, McEnroe seemed listless, Borg remained taciturn. Both are doing their job for the last time this year, so it was primarily up to Godsick to make a fiery plea for the raison d’être of this—his—tournament. You couldn’t blame him. “Look, I look at the metrics on this event, and what’s important to me, like, for example, here at the Uber Arena, we were just told yesterday that this will be their highest-grossing event in their history. They have only been around, I think, since 2008. That says something about the Laver Cup,” said Godsick.

The numbers prove Godsick right, but Godsick has been in the business for so long that he naturally knows that he will not be able to remove the exhibition character from the Uber Arena during these three days in Berlin. Because the truth is that every year, the Laver Cup is above all a meeting place for an exclusive circle of players who have to pretend that they are suddenly a team—and who try to build tradition for a big check. Because that is exactly what the Laver Cup lacks. What makes it different from the Ryder Cup in golf, for example. Or even a simple ATP tournament like the clay-court classic at Hamburg’s Rothenbaum. What will remain of Berlin is already clear: the pictures of the players in front of the Brandenburg Gate, tennis pros in tuxedos at the gala dinner, Roger Federer in all variations, the always fantastically witty Andrea Petkovic as an on-court interviewer on the “iconic” black court, and a bit of theater from Johnny Mac on the sidelines.

People want to see this stuff. “Hopefully we’ll get some of that on the Tennis Channel,” Godsick himself said on Friday. For the mighty tennis manager, there are two other things besides the identity issue that won’t necessarily make things any easier for him in the upcoming editions of the Laver Cup. After the sporting withdrawal of his business partner Roger Federer, Rafael Nadal, it can be said with a clear conscience, will never play for Team Europe again. McEnroe and Borg are both stepping down as captains. Djokovic, once again not taking part in Berlin, has never been a friend of the event. The Laver Cup is losing faces.

Carlos Alcaraz is playing in Berlin this year. A lot is riding on the Spaniard. Just like Jannik Sinner, the No. 1 in men’s tennis, who has decided to take a break after winning the US Open—despite all the financial temptations. And then there is the flood of other exhibitions and team competitions. In October, for example, the “Six Kings Slam” in Saudi Arabia will be vying for an insane amount of prize money. Each of the six players will receive 1.5 million U.S. dollars just for taking part. An additional 6 million U.S. dollars is on offer for the winner. Djokovic, Nadal, Alcaraz, Medvedev, Sinner, and, for some reason, Holger Rune will be participating. That sounds reasonably iconic and, with all due respect, bigger than Thanasi, Kokkinakis, and Cerundolo, the three starters from Team World this year in Berlin.

Do these kinds of events also dilute the importance of the Laver Cup, simply because there is now far too much tennis? “There could be too many other tennis events, per se, but this one is working. We have sold-out crowds. Every player loves to play. We have the biggest captains, the best sponsors,” said Godsick before the start on Friday. What can he say? Late on Friday evening, Grigor Dimitrov also made his first appearance for Team Europe. The Bulgarian played against Chile’s Alejandro Tabilo. The Uber Arena was only half full for the third match of the day. A small fan wearing a Nadal shirt sat with his father in one of the better seats. He looked almost exclusively at his mobile phone during the match. Of course, he was missing Nadal. The kid didn’t seem particularly interested in the Laver Cup action.



The Hopper

—CLAY Tennis on Beatriz Haddad Maia’s US Open run.

—Giri on Iga Swiatek’s loss to Jess Pegula.

—Jon Wertheim’s mailbag is full this week.

—Sara Errani and Andrea Vavasori have won the US Open mixed doubles.

—Tim Newcomb on Taylor Fritz and Asics.



PURE, ORIGINAL TENNIS — SIGN UP!


Coco Hits the Ceiling

Coco's Hits the Ceiling

Coco's Hits the Ceiling

The coaching carousel spins.

The coaching carousel spins.

By Giri Nathan
September 20, 2024

Brad Gilbert takes in Coco Gauff’s serve at the US Open this year. // Getty

Brad Gilbert takes in Coco Gauff’s serve at the US Open this year. // Getty

The more I think about the 2023 US Open women’s final, the stranger that result looks. Aryna Sabalenka losing a hard-court Slam final after going up a set and a break? Unthinkable. Now Sabalenka is the ruler of the hard-court Slams, finaling in the last four and winning three of them. This was the only one she lost. It’s partially because Sabalenka’s game cracked under the pressure of a nasty New York crowd, but it’s also because of the player that crowd was supporting: Coco Gauff, 19 years old and in the middle of the most fruitful stretch of her career.

That was a transformative summer for Gauff. She’d flamed out of Wimbledon after a tough draw of Sofia Kenin in the first round, then, per her dad’s urging, hired Brad Gilbert as coach. The collaboration immediately bore fruit. Gauff won titles in Washington and Cincinnati, and after clambering back into that US Open final with some of the most persistent defense I’ve ever seen, won that, too. In that summer hard-court season she won 17 of 18 matches, culminating in her first major title. She also got what is still her only win over the world’s best player, Iga Swiatek. (She’s lost the other 11 matches.)

Whatever Brad Gilbert, voluble ESPN analyst and sporadic coach to the stars, brought to the team was clearly working. The technical flaws in Gauff’s game were still there, on the serve and forehand, but they didn’t seem to be barring her from victory. Gilbert is arguably most famous for the art of winning with a flawed foundation. And something about Gilbert’s relaxed manner was speaking to Gauff: “The way that he says it. Sometimes it’s not always about the message. I don’t think the message has changed for me, it’s more about how the message was relayed to me,” she said in press at the Open. Months later, in an interview, Gilbert explained his thinking about Gauff at the start of their collaboration. He didn’t think that the wonky forehand, source of so much ire from Gauff observers, was actually that big of a deal. Mostly he wanted to steer her away from offense and toward a more defensive style that tapped into her phenomenal movement—her one true outlier skill on a tennis court, as I see it.

Gauff’s career in the year since that US Open win evokes a specific image in my mind: hitting a ceiling, quite hard, and ending up with a bit of a bruise. She rose to a career-high ranking of No. 2 this season. But all the while, peers like Swiatek and Sabalenka were ascending to a level of tennis that Gauff cannot yet match. It isn’t only a handful of elite players causing her woe, either. This season, Gauff has gone 4–8 against top 20 players, and just 17–15 against top 50 players.

Compared with last summer, this summer left her cold. She had a disappointing showing at the Olympics, where she competed in the singles, doubles, and mixed and took no medal. At Wimbledon and the US Open, she made decent runs, ended both times by Emma Navarro, a countrywoman on the rise, with less buzz but fewer holes in her game. In their first meeting at Wimbledon, Gauff visibly pleaded with her box for advice, and afterward she said, “I felt like I wanted more direction.” In their second meeting, Gauff hit 19 double faults, 11 of them in the third set of the match. Afterward she described how she sometimes drops the left side of her body during her serve, a tendency she’s aware of but struggles to control amid the nerves of a match.

The foundational issues that Gauff had managed to mitigate for stretches of her career came roaring back into prominence. If she’s to keep up with the best players of her era, they’ll still need fixing—but that’ll be someone else’s job. Gilbert, in his strange dual capacity as coach and analyst, was thrown on ESPN immediately after the US Open loss to Navarro, as if to account for it, and he took a bit of a beating on the air. Of course, it is not Gilbert who went out there and hit 60 unforced errors, but it is his job to put her in a mindset where she does not hit 60 unforced errors. It’s easy to say in hindsight, but to anyone who’d been watching closely, it was clear that their collaboration was in its waning days. The body language was already strained by Wimbledon and soured further at the US Open. Gilbert announced the inevitable on Wednesday, thanking the player and the team for their 14 months together and wishing her luck.

From the outside, it’s always hard to grasp precisely why a player cans a coach, but if I were to take the average of the various explanations that players have given over the years, it’s something like this: The brain stops responding to a particular type of motivation. The tips and exhortations recede into background noise. A new voice is needed. Brad Gilbert has…let’s call it an idiosyncratically peppy and chatty style of motivation, which may well have a built-in expiration date for most consumers. Even in the golden days, during the US Open run, there was a moment where Gauff snapped at him from court: “Stop talking.” Now it’s up to her to decide who’s going to start talking next. She could pick up Wim Fissette, who oversaw some of Naomi Osaka’s biggest successes and was also fired this week; Osaka has since been seen with Patrick Mouratoglou, in what strikes me as an extremely unintuitive pairing of student and teacher. The coaching carousel spins on and on and on.



The Hopper

—CLAY Tennis on Beatriz Haddad Maia’s US Open run.

—Giri on Iga Swiatek’s loss to Jess Pegula.

—Jon Wertheim’s mailbag is full this week.

—Sara Errani and Andrea Vavasori have won the US Open mixed doubles.

—Tim Newcomb on Taylor Fritz and Asics.



PURE, ORIGINAL TENNIS — SIGN UP!


Letter to the Future

Letter to the Future

Letter to the Future

A wishlist for next year's slams.

A wishlist for next year's slams.

By Giri Nathan
September 13, 2024

Give yourself a round of applause, Jasmine Paolini // Getty

Give yourself a round of applause, Jasmine Paolini // Getty

That’s it for the Slams this year. That US Open did not quite leave us with a long list of classic matches. I wish all of the visibly exhausted players out there some peace. I know indoor hard-court season technically exists, but I also know the vast majority of these players won’t be fully dialed-in again until they’re back on court in January. So with the year in Slams wrapped, and with some Open memories fresh in mind, here, in no particular order, are a few things I’d like to see at next year’s Slams.


1. More of this Jasmine Paolini. Doesn’t get much better than this: a 28-year-old who’d never gone past the second round of a Slam abruptly becoming one of the most consistent big-match players on tour. She never disappointed. Fourth round in Australia, back-to-back Slam finals at Roland-Garros and Wimbledon, another fourth round at the Open. It is one of the most baffling leaps I can remember any player taking, and I could not recommend the in-person Paolini experience more highly. Her first-round US Open match against Bianca Andreescu—bizarrely, the third matchup between these two players in the past three Slams—was some of the most fun I had all fortnight. There were tense, varied rallies, and as the 5-foot-4 Paolini tackled Andreescu’s loopy shoulder-height balls and outright moon balls with footwork and speed, her singular athleticism shone. Tennis won’t be the same without Diego Schwartzman in it, but it’s a good time to double down on support for our vertically limited players. They add so much thrill and variety to the game.

2. Brandon Nakashima getting in the U.S. mix. In an American hard-court season characterized by widespread success from the American men, it was this 23-year-old, finding his game again after a knee injury, who caught my eye. He picked off top-ranked U.S. men Tommy Paul and Taylor Fritz in consecutive tournaments. He beat an off-kilter Holger Rune so thoroughly that the Dane penned several essays on the subject. He upset Lorenzo Musett, one of the summer’s winningest players. After stealing one set against Sascha Zverev, the Nakashima show met its quick and severe end. His baseline game was always formidable, but I’ve been particularly impressed by his serving this summer, which could elevate him into this new cohort of high-ranked countrymen.

3. A rare, healthy Karolina Muchova. We covered this more extensively last week, but a win for Muchova is a win for tennis and for pure intuition. I’ll keep my demands modest: How about no surgeries in 2024? Let’s start with that and see how much noise she can make.

4. Daniil Medvedev, holding the hardware again. This dude is way too talented to end his career with one Slam to his name. I get that he has had to play out his career while pinned between generational talent—Novak and Rafa on the one side, Carlos and Jannik on the other—but I also think that the man who is so often hailed as a brilliant tactician needs to start finding a way through these younger foes. He should take some wisdom from his three Slam matchups with Sinner this year. The ultra-aggro game plan in the first two sets of the Australian Open final could be something to explore further, a way to shock opponents who have game-planned for the torturous long-rally version of Medvedev. The Wimbledon quarterfinal showed he could take down the best even off of his beloved hard courts—another encouraging step. But a no-show in the quarterfinal on Arthur Ashe was a puzzling step backwards.

5. Alexei Popyrin, reborn? The Aussie was ranked No. 62 when he won a Masters 1000; then a few weeks later he beat Novak Djokovic at the US Open. There are some qualifiers one could apply here: a somewhat depleted post-Olympics field in Montreal, and a somewhat depleted post-Olympics Novak Djokovic (by his own admission). But those are still intriguing accomplishments from a 25-year-old with obvious weapons, if, perhaps, an uneven history of self-actualization. When his game is humming, it is terrifying serve-and-forehand fare. Consistency has been the elusive part. But he has very few points to defend next year and will suddenly be seeded at Slams.

6. Iva Jovic playing the big events. As a reward for winning the U18 National Championships, this 16-year-old junior was given a wild card for the US Open. As the youngest player in the women’s draw, she nearly made it to the third round. I was on Court 12 as she tried to solve the tricky, hard-hitting Ekaterina Alexandrova, who gives even veteran players very little rhythm to work with. Alexandrova had lined up three match points while serving at 5–4, 40–0 in the third, and when she got a little nervy, Jovic surged. She almost bent the match back in her favor before fizzling out at 7–5 in the third. Still, Jovic left the tournament as the youngest American woman to pull off a main-draw win at the Open since 2000. Her smooth all-court game looks like the foundation of a dangerous pro, surely deserving of a wild card somewhere next year if she doesn’t make a rankings leap.

7. Iga Swiatek’s change of pace. It’s hard to be critical of a world No. 1 who’s already assembled a Hall of Fame body of work at age 23, but watching Swiatek in her quarterfinal at the Open, I couldn’t help but think that there were even more levels of tennis for her to unlock. Her loss against Jess Pegula was a frustrating watch, as Swiatek never found her range on her high-spin, high-pace ground strokes but kept ripping away and spraying errors for two sets. I get why Swiatek is committed to this particular approach; it got her to the top of the sport. But I suspect you could count on one hand the drop shots she attempted all tournament. Earlier in her career she was praised for her feel, and it’s time to start folding that back into her game, even if it feels uncomfortable at first.



The Hopper

—CLAY Tennis on Beatriz Haddad Maia’s US Open run.

—Giri on Iga Swiatek’s loss to Jess Pegula.

—Jon Wertheim’s mailbag is full this week.

—Sara Errani and Andrea Vavasori have won the US Open mixed doubles.

—Tim Newcomb on Taylor Fritz and Asics.



PURE, ORIGINAL TENNIS — SIGN UP!


Karolina Muchova Wanted to Be Here

Karolina Muchova Wanted to Be Here

Karolina Muchova Wanted to Be Here

The Czech champ was a balm for the Open.

The Czech champ was a balm for the Open.

By Giri Nathan
September 6, 2024

An on-form Karolina Muchvoa was a joy to watch. // Getty.

An on-form Karolina Muchvoa was a joy to watch. // Getty.

It’s been a raggedy US Open. I have to stretch my memory past the many duds of this second week, all the way past the middle weekend, to recall three high-quality, entertaining matches. Tuesday and Wednesday were two of the worst night sessions I’ve ever attended: injury retirement, blowouts, matches where the two competitors never played well at the same time, disengaged crowds milling around during play and murmuring in nonstop conversation. Does anyone want to be here? This doesn’t feel like the year’s last major; it feels like the waning days of some brutal survivalist exercise. Plenty of players seemed pretty fried on their way out the door. The Olympics often get cited as a reason for this, but perhaps it’s just the broader reality of a sport that’s been getting more athletically demanding and calendrically rigorous with every year and leaves no meaningful offseason for a recharge. Amid all this burnout…there was Karolina Muchova. What a balm for a busted US Open. She could be playing against a wall and it’d be better viewing than half the matches I attended this week.

Within two minutes one can understand why Muchova would have any tennis person waxing rhapsodic, especially the ones who swing a racquet of their own from time to time. Her tennis is the picture you’d have in your head of how tennis should look, the clean mental model from which one tragically deviates. Wouldn’t we all want to look like that? She can do everything. And she seems to navigate her multitudinous options so elegantly. When Muchova is really in the zone, each step of the foot and swing of her racquet seems to be bound by some graceful and inevitable logic to the previous one. She flows from one shot to the next, and it just looks right. Her all-court game is bold but not foolhardy, because it’s backed by sheer talent, because she does have the footwork to dance around any ball, the foot speed to dash forward, and the hand skills to chop anything out of the air or massage ground strokes into the corners. It’s the spiritual opposite of metronomic side-to-side ball-bashing that defines the worst matches. She produces the sort of points that make you understand why people watch tennis in the first place—almost as insistently as, say, Zheng vs. Sabalenka or Medvedev vs. Sinner tried to make me forget—and it’s all I needed this tournament.

It also came out of nowhere. Not long after her semifinal appearance in New York last year, Muchova picked up a wrist injury, one of the scariest for a tennis player, and sat out for nine months before picking up this summer. Muchova has precisely one tennis weakness, and it’s never being healthy. So whenever she is fit to play, and playing well, it’s almost like, oh, right, this person exists and is a miracle. People trip over themselves in praise. Last week the ESPN booth tried, inelegantly, to praise the scarcity of Muchova’s play style in the modern game, and Chris Evert wound up saying that Muchova played “like a guy,” which upset Ons Jabeur, another exponent of this same style, and Evert apologized. Muchova, for her part, said that match that she idolized Roger Federer and liked to borrow from “the guys.” I leave it to the talking heads to debate whether volleying is somehow a gendered trait—seems like a topic Nick Kyrgios might enjoy—but what’s beyond dispute is that few players, on either tour, play as fluently as Muchova does from all areas of the court.

That said, even an in-form Muchova wasn’t immune to the curse of this Open, and after a number of master classes, including one against Naomi Osaka in round 2, she had a mess of a quarterfinal against Beatriz Haddad Maia, which both players spent unwell in some way. That stomach bug left her semifinal performance in question. But watching the first stretch of Muchova’s match against Jessica Pegula made clear that nothing was amiss. Anyone in search of a “flow state” need only look at that first set that Muchova won 6–1 in 28 minutes. My notes devolved into a catalog of every instance of effortless improvisation. Every time I looked, the ball was getting carved up and dropped in some unreachable nook of the court. She looked to be in total control of the match, with a break point to go 3–0 up in the second set, but duffed a put-away volley that both players later cited as the turning point.

Muchova said she became less aggressive, and Pegula significantly stepped up her own level. Soon enough Muchova’s forays to the net were less assured, and Pegula was making her hit much trickier volleys. Pegula channeled the same low, flat pace that allowed her to beat Iga Swiatek the previous night, and eventually flipped the match on its head, taking the second set and breaking early in the third. Muchova’s last real push, down 1–3 in the third, produced some of the most spectacular points of the tournament, a showcase for all the skills, especially this passing shot dropped on a dime with a serene flick of the wrist. It wasn’t enough. A few games later she hurled her racquet some 15 feet in the air in frustration, caught it smoothly on its way down, and even that looked cool. It’s hard not to interpret this result as a collapse from Muchova, considering her scoreboard advantage, but it was a surprise that she managed to replicate last year’s semifinal appearance at all, given how little tennis she’s played since then. If there are tennis gods, they better finally bring her some good health in 2025. You never know when a dire tournament might need her tennis to save it.



The Hopper

—CLAY Tennis on Beatriz Haddad Maia’s US Open run.

—Giri on Iga Swiatek’s loss to Jess Pegula.

—Jon Wertheim’s mailbag is full this week.

—Sara Errani and Andrea Vavasori have won the US Open mixed doubles.

—Tim Newcomb on Taylor Fritz and Asics.



PURE, ORIGINAL TENNIS — SIGN UP!


Forever Young

Forever Young

Forever Young

It wasn’t always easy, but Donald Young had
a notable career.

It wasn’t always easy, but Donald Young had a notable career.

By Van Sias
September 5, 2024

DY in Delray, 2020. // Getty

DY in Delray, 2020. // Getty

“Donald Young is a damn good player.”

That’s what former world No. 187 Scoville Jenkins told me back around the 2016 US Open, for a story I wrote looking at the then-20-year drought of an American male of color reaching a Grand Slam singles final.

It almost looks like truer words have never been spoken as Young, playing the last tournament of his career, is close to achieving Grand Slam glory. He and his longtime friend Taylor Townsend have advanced to finals of this year’s mixed doubles tournament, besting their semifinals appearance a decade ago. The duo are scheduled to play Italians Sara Errani and Andrea Vavassori on Thursday.

It’s a fairy-tale run, to be sure, with Young spending more time as a professional pickleball player the past few years. Win or lose, though, it seems as if the tennis gods are doing Young a solid, allowing the longtime Atlanta resident to perfectly close the door on a career that’s seen more twists and turns than I-285.

Around the time of that Jenkins quote, Young and three-time defending US Open doubles champion Rajeev Ram were the only American men of color in the top 100 in singles.

It was the post–James Blake/pre–Frances Tiafoe era, where for years Young was the lone Black American in the ATP tournaments he entered, either by direct entry, wild cards, or the qualifying route.

Among the highs of a decade-long career at that point were a top 100 ranking debut at 18, two years after turning pro. There were the stints on Team USA in the game’s biggest international competitions outside of the majors: the Olympics and Davis Cup. There were a couple of showings in the second week of a Grand Slam, with two round-of-16 appearances in New York. One would be hard-pressed to say Young didn’t display a fighting spirit as he rebounded on multiple occasions from injury and loss of form to land back in the top 100, peaking at 38 at one point.

And in 2017, Young would surprisingly reach the French Open men’s doubles final, joining Arthur Ashe, MaliVai Washington, and Bryan Shelton as African-American men who played for a major crown.

Those ranking dips, though, and what didn’t happen often overshadowed Young’s accomplishments. He was a junior prodigy, winning majors and sitting atop the world rankings at an age younger than any boy before him or since.

Having separated himself from the pack, Young turned pro at 16, signing major endorsement deals and seeming like a can’t-miss prospect. However, while he was able to confound his opponents in the juniors with his shotmaking ability and court sense, it was a much different story when he took the court against grown men fighting for their livelihood. He did put in the work to eventually match up physically, but there was another concern about how he was going to establish a foothold in the game.

For the vast majority of his career, Young was coached by his parents, Donald Sr. and Ilona, who definitely knew the sport as teaching pros but didn’t have what might have been considered as “world-class experience.” In hindsight, the argument does lose merit as Chris Eubanks and Townsend have also had their games shaped by the Youngs at different points. Atlanta is considered a national hotbed for the sport, particularly among the Black community, with the Youngs having a significant role in that over the years. Many highly touted juniors have the backing of their national federation, especially early on, but the Youngs, at times, went their own route, and the relationship between Donald and the United States Tennis Association definitely had its contentious moments.

Another of Young’s most infamous battles took place both on and off the court with another former wunderkind, Ryan Harrison, where allegations of racism reared up.

And through it all, the player who once spoke of contending for Grand Slams was unable to win an ATP Tour-level singles title, despite making two finals.

Young’s journey has definitely been noteworthy: from double-digit losing streaks to Grand Slam finals, from shy kid with no familiar faces around him on the tour to representing his country on the biggest stages.

Things might not have gone as hoped for or planned, but Young should be proud of the fact that he got the most out of his game, proving that he indeed was a damn good player.


The Hopper

—Andy Murray has finally retired.

—And so has Angelique Kerber.

—Carlitos has withdrawn from Montreal.

—CLAY Tennis remembers the time Novak abandoned his partner.

—Rafa and Novak play one for the road, via Giri.

—The Washington, D.C. ATP tournament is in full swing.

—Some schedule changes to the WTA’s China Swing.



PURE, ORIGINAL TENNIS — SIGN UP!


The US Open Shoe Report

The US OPEN
Shoe Report

The US Open
Shoe Report

Players and brands are ready to get noticed
in the Big Apple.

Players and brands are ready to get noticed in the Big Apple.

By Tim Newcomb
August 29, 2024

Paris may be a fashion capital and London may hold a monopoly on tennis heritage, but New York City is about being seen. And there are plenty of players ready for that. From bows for Naomi Osaka’s Nike shoes to a brand-new signature New Balance design for Coco Gauff and Andrey Rublev donning a yet-to-be-released K-Swiss model and Novak Djokovic in another new personalized Asics colorway, we’ve got plenty of shoes to watch during the 2024 US Open.

FRANCES TIAFOE

Nike Zoom GP Challenge 1 ‘Premium’

Frances Tiafoe doesn’t have a player-edition model from Nike, but he’s wearing the Nike Zoom GP Challenge 1 Premium model, a white and orange colorway that dropped for the US Open and has New York City detailing. The shoe features “NYC” on the lace tag and has additional Nike-plus-NYC highlights on the tongue and sockliner. Tiafoe also added a walkout shoe to his repertoire by wearing a The Surgeon custom-designed Nike sneaker in a marketing deal with Cadillac.

Images courtesy of Nike

Images courtesy of Nike

Andrey Rublev

Unreleased K-Swiss

Andrey Rublev and K-Swiss announced a partnership ahead of the US Open that will eventually include a capsule collection with Rublev’s Rublo brand. But for now, Rublev is in a full K-Swiss kit with his new Rublo logo on the shirt, including wearing a yet-unreleased footwear model. The new shoe will become available at retail in January 2025, and Rublev is the only K-Swiss athlete wearing the model this season. Expect to see the silhouette as part of the Rublo collection when it releases.

Image courtesy of K-Swiss

Image courtesy of K-Swiss

NAOMI OSAKA

Nike Zoom GP Challenge 1 PE

Naomi Osaka’s shoes have bows—and not just the tied laces. As part of a collaboration between Nike and fashion designer Yoon Ahn, who created a special on-court kit and off-court accessories for Osaka’s US Open, the custom-made Nike Zoom GP Challenge 1 Premium shoes for Osaka also feature a bow on the heel. Osaka has both a black kit and a white and green kit, and we first saw the “black and summit white” shoes in a photo shoot and the “summit white and vivid green” shoes at practice. She wore the white and green during her first match on Tuesday, a day event. Expect to see the black at night.

Image courtesy of Nike

Image courtesy of Nike

COCO GAUFF

New Balance Coco CG2 ‘Power and Grace’

After two straight years of new colorways for every tennis major, plus extra designs along the way, the 2024 US Open offers up the first tournament where the defending women’s champion will play in the brand-new New Balance Coco CG2 signature model. With an upper inspired by the New Balance 550, the midtop shoe’s colorway riffs off New York City, the site of Gauff’s first major victory last year. Dubbed the Power and Grace colorway, the shoe’s base blue color ties to the Statue of Liberty, with the bright yellow a nod to New York’s bright lights.

Image courtesy of New Balance

Image courtesy of New Balance

NOVAK DJOKOVIC

Asics Court FF 3 Novak

Novak Djokovic’s Lacoste apparel went all blue for the 2024 US Open, so his Asics Court FF 3 Novak shoes follow suit. Asics has recently placed the number of major singles titles Djokovic has in numeric fashion on his sneakers, and this tournament the “24” appears small on the side of his shoes near the collar. Since he’s a lead athlete for Asics footwear, the Novak version of the Court FF 3 comes with his personal logo on the tongue and heel.

Asics

Asics

BENOIT PAIRE

Babolat Propulse Fury 3 Paire

Back in the spring Babolat surprised us all with a special player-edition model of the Propulse Fury 3 for Benoit Paire, complete with plenty of edginess. The model returned for the US Open, this time in white and pink, but still with the specialized three icons that feature a tennis racquet and ball (yeah, not edgy), a cocktail glass with an olive on the rim highlighting Paire’s party-first lifestyle (a little edgier), and then a cat, a reference to a vulgar phrase he yells to opponents after they hit a winner (okay, lots of edge). Of course, Paire didn’t make it out of qualifying, so we won’t see the shoes in the main draw.

Image courtesy of Babolat

Babolat


Nike’s Andre Agassi Hot Lava love is a subtle theme for the US Open. We saw Carlos Alcaraz walk out on court in the remake of the Air Tech Challenge 2 that releases Aug. 30, and some of the players not wearing the “Premium” models of shoes with a New York City theme are instead wearing Hot Lava colorways, such as Jannik Sinner, now available in a few of the Nike silhouettes.


Daniil Medvedev has a recurring spot in the Shoe Report thanks to his player-edition Lacoste AG-LT Ultra model. For New York, he’s got “Daniil M.” on the tongue and has choices between multiple shoes featuring shades of blue with white. He opted for a white-based version for his opening-day match on Tuesday.

Image courtesy of Lacoste


Wilson kits have been on the up for over a year. The shoes are now following suit. Along with a fun stable of Pro Staff 87 lifestyle options, the new Rush Pro 4.5 is donning the feet of Wilson head-to-toe professionals. And Wilson is doing something different with Marta Kostyuk, not only putting her in an all-yellow dress but also a pair of player-edition white and yellow shoes to match.


Following a special player-edition shoe for Carlos Alcaraz at Wimbledon that Nike also made available at retail, the Spanish star is back in the “Premium” colorway of Nike shoes that feature the New York City-centric detailing across the entire brand’s silhouettes.


Ben Shelton broke out a pair of black On The Roger Pro 2s for his first-round match, showing a bit of deviation from the white-based models we’ve seen from On for the on-court experience in the past. Iga Swiatek, also wearing On, opted for the mostly white version of The Roger Pro 2s.


One of Shoe Report’s favorite under-the-radar players to watch is Leylah Fernandez. Last year’s US Open saw the Canadian break out Puma basketball shoes for doubles play. Since, she’s switched up and worn Asics, Puma, On, and even a brand-new Aesem Athletica brand her father is starting up. She tells me that she’s always enjoyed trying different types of shoes to see what she likes best. For the 2024 US Open she appears to be in a nondescript pair from Aesem that matches her Lululemon dress.


Adidas offers up nine footwear silhouettes across its men’s and women’s line, all featuring flash aqua and lucid blue, including the newest addition to the mix, the Defiant Speed 2. All Adidas-sponsored players will wear the shoe of their choice in the US Open colorway.


Follow Tim Newcomb’s tennis gear coverage on Instagram at Felt Alley Tennis.

SIGN UP — YOU'RE ONLY AS GOOD AS YOUR SECOND SERVE.


A Dangerous Mind

A Dangerous Mind

A Dangerous Mind

A review of Searching for Novak by Mark Hodgkinson.

A review of Searching for Novak by Mark Hodgkinson.

By Patrick J. Sauer
August 28, 2024

Novak Djokovic pulls a crying face to the crowd after he is booed during the Wimbledon semis in 2023. “When the crowd’s down on Djokovic, his blood is up, and he has the special Serbian type of dark energy,” writes Hodgkinson // Getty

Novak Djokovic pulls a crying face to the crowd after he is booed during the Wimbledon semis in 2023. “When the crowd’s down on Djokovic, his blood is up, and he has the special Serbian type of dark energy,” writes Hodgkinson // Getty

A funny thing happened to me on the way to Novak Djokovic’s Olympic gold. For the first time, I found myself cheering for him. Not in a fist-pumping “Lettttttt’ssss goooooooo!!!!” kind of way; more in cap-tipping, “Goddamn, you’ve done it all. There are no tennis mountains left to scale” astonishment. I’ve never been on the extreme end of the anti-Novakkers, the Fedal stans who never got over the Serbian skunk at their lawn garden party, but I’ve actively rooted against his tying and breaking Serena’s Slam mark. So much for that.

What is it about Novak Djokovic that makes him, in my anecdotal estimation, the least loved all-time world-class athlete of my 50-odd years on earth, the Belgrade diaspora notwithstanding? If styles make the fights, he’s the best counterpuncher the sport has seen, with agility that feels like he was bitten by a radioactive spider. And yet I’m hoping Carlos Alcaraz goes on a five-year Grand Slam tear. So color me intrigued by Searching for Novak: The Man Behind the Enigma from British tennis writer Mark Hodgkinson, which purports to be the “first serious analysis” of Djokovic. What I found is a book mystifying and infuriating in equal measure, but one that certainly had me seeing the man in a new refracted light. He really puts the thwack in thwackadoodle.

The book opens strong, as the author takes readers inside the cold, cramped concrete shelter where, in 1999, an 11-year-old Novak and his family bugged out for 78 consecutive nights of NATO bombings. In a harrowing scene, Hodgkinson writes that after a few minutes he craved air and natural light, but even more astounding was that war-torn Serbia didn’t slow down young Novak one bit. Every day, he would figure out what parks weren’t covered in rubble and, since school was shuttered, play tennis until the sun set, and so did he, down in the bunker. The horrors of war sparked a competitive fire in him, a thirst for revenge he took to the courts.

It fueled him early on, and Searching for Novak is at its best as he rises through the ranks up through 2010, covering the highly entertaining Djoker impersonations, anxiety management through incessant ball-bouncing, and how there were once grumblings he faked injuries and ailments to drop out of losing matches. That ended when he stopped eating gluten. There’s a whole chapter about it. Hodgkinson divides Novak’s career into the before/after wheat protein binary, which is fitting, because in the second half of the book, I became allergic to bullshit.

Some of Novak’s bonkers beliefs—or at least ones proffered by people who have his ear—make for a good time. My favorite comes from Semir Osmanagic, a fedora-wearing Bosnian archaeologist who in 2005 said he discovered “the Pyramids of the Sun, the Moon, the Dragon and Love,” and suggested water found beneath it “enhances Djokovic intellectually and emotionally.” Novak thought it a good idea to join Osmanagic—a man “a group of Bosnian academics have appealed to their government to stop, saying he is embarrassing to the country”—down 82 feet into tunnels with 52-degree chest-high water “without any safety rails or support,” just some protective waterproof gear. Magic Pyramid Water, definitely worth risking a Wimbledon grass snack for.

Novak with archaeologist Semir Osmanagic at the “Bosnian Pyramid of the Sun" in Visoko, Bosnia and Herzegovina, 2020. // Alamy

Novak with archaeologist Semir Osmanagic at the “Bosnian Pyramid of the Sun" in Visoko, Bosnia and Herzegovina, 2020. // Alamy

There are so many amusing nutty details in Searching for Novak, like the time he set an alarm to remind himself it had been a year since he had eaten a small piece of dark chocolate, but the book is also awash in credulity. Hodgkinson says point blank in the intro that Djokovic “has the most original mind in tennis, perhaps across all sports,” and then notes multiple times that he doesn’t read newspapers or watch television news. If you know nothing, then you know everything. See, an enigma.

Other primo nuggets include: “When the crowd’s down on Djokovic, his blood is up, and he has the special Serbian type of dark energy” (not a thing); “He’s not an entitled tennis diva. He’s not being difficult and demanding for the sake of it” (give or take a US Open line judge); and “He’s the future billionaire who hardly cares for money” (I’ll see your balderdash and raise you mansions on multiple continents).

Too often, Searching for Novak has the feel of one of those ghostwritten business or tech books where a mediocre white man has final say on his genius on the page. Obviously, Novak isn’t one of those guys, he’s on a GOAT short list—although Hodgkinson stating he absolutely is because “you have to go with the hard data on who has won the most majors” isn’t exactly “smart analysis”—but the constant fluffing from every talking head, including luminaries like Chris Evert, makes Novak less sympathetic and way more insufferable.

A case for tennis immortality can be made, but the man doesn’t walk on water. Oh, but wait, a boyhood coach says Novak has a mental energy that “goes somewhere over the line which belongs to God, to the creator.” And a “former advisor on nutrition and life” says of his homie, “Maybe it’s not the best comparison but look at Jesus. He was also exposed and punished by officials at the time.”

Of course the latter comment was in regards to Novak not getting the Covid jab, a section of the book in which the fun, weird Novak-galaxy brain took a dark personal turn and brought back my peak pandemic rage all over again. In the chapter “Prison Life,” Hodgkinson makes Novak’s time being detained in a crappy motel out to be a Melbourne version of Midnight Express. I’m sure it was a grungy hell for the “unlawful non-citizens” (aka refugees and asylum seekers) stuck in tiny rooms and eating industrial cafeteria food for years. Novak was there for five days with a laptop, exercise equipment, and gluten-free grub. Not a diva.

The chapter that follows, “The Villain of the World,” is an entire section of quackery from every corner of Novak’s coterie, including himself. Hodgkinson writes that Novak didn’t regret “being unvaccinated and everything that came with it.” Cool. You know what came with it for me? Putting on a hazmat suit and holding my mother’s hand in a New Jersey hospital room as she died while we were literally watching Joe Biden’s national pre-inauguration Covid mourning ceremony. But hey, Hodgkinson intimates that it’s understandable a man who treats his body like a temple wouldn’t take the shot, and besides, Novak’s old pal Idiotana Jones had thoughts about how “high levels of negative ions in the tunnels beneath the Bosnian pyramids would have boosted his immunity against Covid,” and that “we don’t know the content of the experimental genetical pharmaceutical product, but I do know the content of what’s happening in the tunnels.”

You know what? I think I’m done searching for Novak. An enigma? Maybe. A jackass? Definitely. Let’s go, Carlitos.



PURE, ORIGINAL TENNIS — SIGN UP!


Human Touch

Human Touch

Human Touch

Keep the Champagne on Ice for Anna Kalinskaya.

Keep the Champagne on Ice for Anna Kalinskaya.

By Raphael Abraham
Photography by Dan Martensen
Styling by Chloe Grace Press

 

Featured in Volume 1 of OPEN Tennis — BUY

Human Touch

Human Touch

Keep the Champagne on Ice for Anna Kalinskaya.

Keep the Champagne on Ice for Anna Kalinskaya.

By Raphael Abraham
Photography by Dan Martensen
Styling by Chloe Grace Press

 

Featured in Volume 1 of OPEN Tennis — BUY

Anna Kalinskaya is in a buoyantly positive mood. It is the eve of Wimbledon when we meet in the bucolic surroundings of an English country garden, mere minutes away from the hallowed courts on which she will soon do battle.

She has reasons to be cheerful. Since the start of the year, the Russian player has risen from relative obscurity at 80 in the world rankings to 17, making the quarterfinals of the Australian Open and the final of the Dubai Tennis Championships, beating world No. 1 Iga Swiatek and No. 3 Coco Gauff along the way.

If that weren’t enough, she has also been making headlines for another reason. In May it was confirmed by Italian world No. 1 Jannik Sinner that the two are in a relationship. With the steamy tennis movie Challengers playing in theaters, social media was soon aflutter at the forming of this new sports power couple. Exactly 50 years after lovebirds Chris Evert and Jimmy Connors lifted the Wimbledon singles trophies, could Kalinskaya and Sinner pull off a similar feat?

But when we meet, Kalinskaya makes clear that she has not come to talk about Sinner. The week before, she has made the leap to grass, reaching the final of the Berlin Ladies Open, losing only narrowly to America’s Jessica Pegula (meanwhile, in another part of Germany, Sinner won the Halle tournament). Many players struggle with the shift from clay to lawn tennis, yet Kalinskaya tells me she takes it in her stride.

“People either love it or hate it, but for me it’s probably the easiest change because I like to play very fast and aggressive, and grass is perfect for that,” she says. “I had a goal to be top 20 this year. Now I reached it and I have a new goal: to be top 10 and to be consistent with my results. I love playing on grass, I love playing on hard court, so I’m very excited. And my No. 1 goal is to stay healthy so I can work and show what I’m capable of.”

It is her third time in the Wimbledon main draw, and her first since 2021. “I couldn’t play one year here because of the situation in my country, and last year I was injured, so finally this year I’m back.”

It hardly needs stating what “the situation” is. Kalinskaya’s mother and grandmother hail from Dnipro in eastern Ukraine, which on the day after Kalinskaya’s first-round Wimbledon match is the target of a Russian drone and missile strike that kills five people and injures 53.

However, I am told before we sit down together that politics is off the table and nor will she speak about Ukraine. It is no surprise. Most Russian and Belarusian players remain tight-lipped about the war, understandably so given that they or their families still reside in Putin’s Russia. In March 2022, two weeks after the invasion of Ukraine, Kalinskaya appeared to offer a silent protest by wearing shoes bearing the words “No war” at the Indian Wells tournament in California.

_________

Though she was born and grew up in Moscow, it was in Ukraine that Kalinskaya’s love of tennis was born.

“When I was little, every summer I used to spend with my grandmother and my cousin, who used to play tennis,” she says. “I wanted to do whatever she was doing, so I decided to try it. I had a little racquet, and I remember one day my mom asked me if I wanted a new one just for myself. I guess it was someone’s racquet [I was using], not even mine. I said yes.”

Kalinskaya, a sociable child, found that it was not only the game but the camaraderie it offered that she relished. “I started to play with kids in a group. I enjoyed it because I was always very friendly, and it was like a social thing for me to play with [other] kids. I liked to compete, and I still love to compete. That’s why I’m doing it.”

Unlike many other players on the tour, Kalinskaya was not born into a tennis family. Rather, her parents favored another racquet-based game: badminton.

“It’s a very difficult sport,” she says. “I played for a couple of years, and I was actually doing well. I did three sports at the same time—I used to swim, too—and I was good in all three. But I got bored of swimming and playing badminton…and my parents supported my decision, so I continued to play tennis.”

Now that she is a professional tennis player, can she beat her parents? “That’s a good question, because last December I played badminton with my mom, and she’s not…” she pauses momentarily, as if pondering how to put this politely, “she’s not 25 like me, but she can still beat me. It’s very difficult, a lot of cardio. I’m glad I stopped,” she concludes with a chuckle.

The sporty streak in her family runs deep and extends to her brother, Nikolay, who plays soccer for FC Pari Nizhny Novgorod. He is her only sibling, five years her senior. “He inspires me a lot because he’s very professional and I see how much he works,” she says. “Even on his days off, he goes to the gym. It seems like he doesn’t have days off.”

Leisure time is vanishingly rare on the tennis tour, too, leaving scant opportunity for pursuing outside interests or cultivating friendships. Nevertheless, Kalinskaya has established a close bond with her compatriot Daria Kasatkina.

“We have known each other since we are 10,” Kalinskaya says. “And I’m friends with Aryna Sabalenka. It’s difficult with our schedules to find time to go for dinners, but yeah, I would say that those two are my closest friends.”

When I contact Kasatkina over email, she tells me: “Anna has always had so much potential and she has so many weapons on the court, it was just a case of her bringing it all together. She showed glimpses at times in big matches like against [former US Open champion] Sloane Stephens in New York [in 2019], where her big personality can shine.”

Sabalenka adds in a text message: “She has become a better fighter, not giving up that easily, definitely started to play a bit more aggressive, with more confidence.”

But, notes Kasatkina, her recent rise in the rankings and newfound fame hasn’t changed Kalinskaya. “For me she is the same girl, which is amazing, and it’s so good to see her doing well now.”

As well as a sometime top 10 player and Wimbledon quarterfinalist, Kasatkina is an outspoken critic of Russia’s war in Ukraine and its record on gay rights. She is also a prodigious vlogger with a popular YouTube channel on which Kalinskaya is an occasional guest. In one recent post, Kasatkina teasingly asks her pal: “Carrot cake? Yes or no?”—a barely cryptic reference to the ginger-haired Sinner, to which Kalinskaya responds, “Fuck you,” before the two collapse into giggles.

As Kasatkina puts it in an email: “Anna is so funny and has a quick mind. She is good fun to be around and is a great person.” How would she describe her sense of humour? “Dark, mischievous and on point!”

In another episode of Kasatkina’s vlog, Kalinskaya lets slip a scathing comment about her fellow tennis players: “There are many snakes on the tour, let’s be honest.”

Would she care to elaborate now on this observation? “It’s impossible,” Kalinskaya says. “You have to be so careful because at the end of the day, you have the same job. But a lot of people are jealous and can be double-faced—that’s what I meant by saying ‘snakes.’”

It’s the kind of content that tennis fans lap up, showing another side of the players whose comportment on and around the court is almost always oh-so-polite and cautiously diplomatic.

“Dasha [Kasatkina] has her YouTube channel, and I think [American player] Taylor Fritz has one, or his girlfriend [influencer Morgan Riddle]. It helps tennis to become more popular. And now all these fashion brands have tennis trends. I see more and more people wanting to play tennis, and it’s really great. I think for women’s tennis what helps a lot is actually fashion.”

Style and beauty are two of Kalinskaya’s passions away from the court. Asked to name her favorite brands, she says: “I like Chanel, I like Miu Miu. I like a lot what they did with tennis skirts, matching them with sneakers. I would say those are my top two.” She also admits to an obsession with footwear: “I like shoes…a lot.”

How many pairs does she have? “A lot,” repeats the Imelda Marcos of tennis. “I saw [Australian player] Alex de Minaur was asked if has more than 100 pair of shoes. He said yes and I think I have more than him for sure, if you combine high heels and normal sports shoes.”

He probably doesn’t have high heels, I suggest. “Well, who knows?” she says with a wry smile. She seems competitive even about shoe ownership. “I’m sure with the girls on tour, I win.”

Another interest is visiting museums and galleries. She has already made time for a pre-Wimbledon excursion to London’s Natural History Museum, and we discuss a possible trip to Tate Modern. In Rome, she says, she wanted to see the Vatican. For the art or also for religious reasons? “For the art.”

What about watching tennis? “I like to watch men’s tennis,” she declares. “I feel they have more options of shots and more tactics.” Does she have a favorite player? “I’m not going to say,” she says, turning her head away in smiling defiance. “Next question!”

This is not, I assure her, an attempt to steer her into talking about Sinner. She can name anyone she likes. “No, it’s too dangerous,” she says with a laugh, before offering finally, “Okay…Roger”—a shrewd and safe answer. But there is a sting in the tail. When I ask later if there were any players she looked up to while growing up, she says: “Nadal. I was obsessed with him. But then he lost a match against Roger. And I became a Roger fan. Rafa had a few match points and lost. I was so disappointed. So after that I never watched him again.”

Brutal. But Kalinskaya is unafraid to speak her mind, at least when it comes to tennis. And she too has taken some hard losses, falling to Pegula in Berlin after being match point up six times. Nevertheless, she was gracious in defeat, telling her opponent in her runner-up speech: “If we play like this against each other every time, I will be happy for both of us.”

When it comes to losses, she tries to retain a philosophical outlook. “I always look at the bigger picture. So I take more positive from losing in Dubai. I was not feeling great there. But I pushed myself to the final and I almost won the tournament, so for me it was incredible. Of course it’s disappointing to lose, and now I lost another final [in Berlin], being so, so close, but that’s just the game. I hope I can use this experience for a more important final in London or maybe at the US Open.”

When I ask how she works on her mental game, she rolls her eyes wearily and emits a small groan.

“The mental part is super difficult,” she admits. “You miss a lot of things being on tour; you miss your family, you can’t have a normal life, you always travel…. It’s a very challenging sport. You don’t fight only against your opponent, you fight against yourself. And it’s very important for me to have good, positive people around me. That’s the key…. At the end of the day we’re just human, and you just wish you have a person who understands you.”

_________

The following week at Wimbledon, she gets off to a flying start, dispatching Hungary’s Panna Udvardy in the first round, the Czech Marie Bouzkova in the second, and her compatriot Liudmila Samsonova in the third—all without dropping even a set.

Kalinskaya on court is grace personified, generating easy power without any hint of a grunt, her flat, penetrating shots skidding off the slick surface. In the stands sit her Argentine coach Patricia Tarabini and the doting Sinner, looking saintly in a pristine white hoodie that conceals his face and keeping a low profile. Kalinskaya too looks calm and contained, her victory celebrations muted. Coming off court, she is mobbed by a small swarm of autograph hunters and selfie seekers.

But in the fourth round against 2022 Wimbledon champion Elena Rybakina—Kalinskaya’s Centre Court debut—disaster strikes. The fragile humanity she referred to becomes all too clear in the second set when she calls for medical assistance and is finally forced to retire with a wrist injury. Her “No. 1 goal to stay healthy” has temporarily been derailed.

“It’s very frustrating, very sad,” she says in the post-match press conference. “It’s probably my favorite tournament. But I’m human and I can’t fully control my body. I have to accept it and just find out what’s going on right now, recover, and prevent it in the future.”

My mind returns to something she told me in that cozy garden before the tournament.

“Every week, more or less, you lose, but you need to keep going. The next day, you can have a different tournament already. And you need to recharge, recover, and forget. And it’s important to learn from when you lose. Sometimes you don’t have much time, but also, it’s a great opportunity. Because there are many tournaments and you have another chance.”

There will be more tournaments, more runs at Grand Slams. When Kalinskaya talks about eventually winning one, it is in terms of “when” rather than “if.” And afterward there will be celebration. (As Kasatkina reliably informs me: “Anna knows how to have a party correctly.”) When I mention that Novak Djokovic famously indulged after winning an Australian Open by eating a single square of chocolate, Kalinskaya looks appalled.

“Really? I’m going to have a glass of champagne for sure when I win a Grand Slam,” she says.

Maybe two?

“Or a bottle…and don’t ask how many pairs of shoes I’m going to buy.”

TENNIS. ART. CULTURE. FASHION. TRAVEL. IDEAS. — SIGN UP