Offseason Shoe Report

The Offseason
Shoe Report

The Offseason
Shoe Report

New on-court and lifestyle shoes expand tennis offerings.

New on-court and lifestyle shoes expand tennis offerings.

By Tim Newcomb
December 4, 2024

The offseason—if the concept of an offseason even exists anymore in tennis—typically brings a flurry of new tennis gear announcements, and this year is no different. As far as footwear is concerned, Mizuno has launched a new on-court shoe, Adidas has given us an update to the Ubersonic line, Nike is still all-in on Naomi Osaka, and K-Swiss is dipping into nostalgia for a new lifestyle model. As other brands will certainly enter the fray over the next few months with updated offerings, here’s a roundup of the latest.

Adidas Adizero Ubersonic 5

The Adidas Ubersonic franchise, focused on on-court speed, continues its fascination with lightweight movement with the line’s new Adizero Ubersonic 5. Announced Dec. 3, the shoe features a Speedframe technology new to tennis that boasts a three-piece heel construction popular in soccer and rugby cleats for stability during rapid changes of direction. The low-profile Lightstrike foam midsole and upper (the brand’s proprietary lightweight cushioning and mesh) create a low-to-the-ground feel with minimal weight. The shoe will debut during the Australian Open in “lucid red.”

Images courtesy of Adidas

Images courtesy of Adidas

Mizuno Wave Enforce Court

The long-standing and popular Mizuno Wave Enforce Tour now has a new on-court sibling in the Wave Enforce Court, a lighter version of the Tour model. Complete with the brand’s Enerzy foam paired with additional foam to make this the most cushioned option in the Mizuno stable, the latest from Mizuno signals an emphasis on growing the Mizuno tennis footwear lineup.

Image courtesy of Mizuno

Image courtesy of Mizuno

Nike GP Challenge 1 Osaka

Naomi Osaka is still making her fashion mark at Nike. The latest in a line of retail-ready player-edition models has been released with a new on-court GP Challenge 1. This “Osaka” version features plenty of brown and orange hues and comes with Osaka’s “NO” logo on the tongue. As with other models, the phrase “Return unto others twice as hard as they serve unto you” is on the shoe’s upper.

Image courtesy of Nike

Image courtesy of Nike

K-Swiss Si-18 International

An on-court mainstay when first introduced in 1989, the Si-18 International has been reissued once again by K-Swiss as a vintage lifestyle model. The flagship red, white, and blue retains its classic look, complete with the flags of the home countries of the sport’s four tennis majors on the back heel. The brand says the model is reengineered for additional comfort while still featuring a leather upper and a ski-boot-inspired cinch lacing system.

Image courtesy of K-Swiss

Image courtesy of K-Swiss

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

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


Adios, Amigo

Adios, Amigo

Adios, Amigo

Tennis Channel lets the door hit Rafa on the way out.

Tennis Channel lets the door hit Rafa on the way out.

By Giri Nathan
November 22, 2024

Rafa says goodbye at Davis Cup in Malaga this week. // Getty

Rafa says goodbye at Davis Cup in Malaga this week. // Getty

Rafael Nadal retired on Tuesday at the age of 38. He gave tennis everything. Possibly no player has given it more. But did tennis give him a sufficient farewell? Perhaps an unreasonable standard was set by other recent exits. Serena Williams got to retire at her home Slam, wearing crystal-encrusted outfits, pulling off some surprising wins, in front of one of the most batshit crowds I’ve ever been a part of. Roger Federer got to show up at his own pet tournament, play doubles alongside his iconic rival, and weep with him while holding hands. The level of fan service in those instances was astonishing. And justly so! Millions of people were deeply invested in these lives and careers. Just as there were millions more curious to see tennis’ greatest fighter say goodbye this week.

Part of what made it so tricky is that Rafa himself was never clear and conclusive about when he wanted to end his career. In January 2023, he hurt his hip and spent the whole year recovering. In May of that year, he convened a press conference to announce that the 2024 season would be his last. What a wonderful, characteristically Rafa quote he gave at that time: “I believe I don’t deserve to finish [now]. I think I have fought enough during all my sporting career so that my end is not today, here in a press conference. My ending will be in another way, and I will fight so that my end will be in another way.”

I was eager to see what ending he might choose, on his own terms. Throughout 2024, though, Nadal kept leaving the door slightly ajar, sometimes making remarks that conflicted with the finality of that 2023 announcement. Each time he played a tournament it was probably, but not definitely, his last time at the tournament. It seemed that Rafa was constantly reassessing his level, monitoring his tennis for any sign he should call off the retirement plan.

Of course, there was one tournament that mattered above all the others. When I arrived in Paris for Roland-Garros, my top priority was seeing Nadal play on Chatrier, which I’d never done before. He was to play Sascha Zverev; there wasn’t going to be a second-round match in his future. Nadal had apparently informed the tournament at the outset that he did not want a ceremony. But what we got instead was completely botched. Tennis has a question-and-answer problem. For some reason, in these life-changing and emotional moments, tournaments think it’s a good idea to get someone up there with a mic asking specific questions, rather than simply handing players the mic and letting them process these overpowering emotions in real time. This question-and-answer session was predictably muddled, and the crowd, ready to roar to life, went dead. I arrived at that match expecting tears, and left merely wanting a beer. If this was really the end, how could we send off a 14-time champion this way?

But come October, there was no more ambiguity. Nadal announced that Davis Cup would be his last-ever competition. It was a fair choice. The tie was in Malaga, Spain. He was surrounded by Spanish players past and present. His spiritual successor, Carlos Alcaraz, was there. (The kid has been taking it pretty hard, posting sad memes about his hero’s retirement.) Nadal was training in advance of the event, and in the end he was declared fit to play singles. He played Botic van de Zandschulp—who, having already upset Alcaraz at the US Open, has played an outsize role in Spanish tennis this year—and lost to the comically stone-faced Dutchman, who is the precise emotional opposite of Nadal on a tennis court. The match was just competitive enough. Plenty of fight, even if Rafa’s true level was long gone.

Afterward, we got to see Rafa as a fan and tactician, watching with enthusiasm as Alcaraz won his singles match, and then looking on in sadness as Alcaraz and Marcel Granollers lost the doubles, ensuring that this was the last possible day that Nadal was on a tennis court as a professional. Nadal took the mic. Like many American tennis fans, I jacked up the volume on Tennis Channel. He spoke in Spanish, naturally. And then…Tennis Channel pulled up a split screen, showing us the studio. Surely this was some kind of technical error. It would pass. Maybe they meant to bring on a Spanish translator for the speech. Or, even if there was no translator, that’s fine too—simply show us Rafa and the people sobbing on the sidelines and in the crowd. This one should be pretty easy.

And yet, while one of the most beloved tennis players in history delivered his final words, the audio of his speech was dialed down and overridden by the audio of three TC employees in a studio riffing vaguely and extemporaneously about his career. Was this really happening? Even when Nadal began speaking in English, I couldn’t hear it over the aimless studio chatter. I was in disbelief then, and days later, I remain in a state of disbelief. I don’t think I’m alone. Fans show up to these occasions hoping for A Moment; what we got felt something like the part of the infomercial where people talk about how exciting and versatile the gimmicky duct tape is. Rafael Nadal is not a gimmicky duct tape that you slap on a leaky boat. How could this happen? The channel had more than a month after Nadal’s announcement to prepare for this broadcast. This wasn’t exactly an improvised response.

Tennis is a good sport, dense with poignant moments. Why does it often self-sabotage when it comes to making those moments accessible and digestible to its audiences? It’s hard to imagine a bigger failure of broadcasting than what played out on Tuesday. I hope, in 20 years, when I try to revisit my memory of Rafa Nadal’s retirement, I won’t be evoking the colors and surfaces of a Tennis Channel studio. But I can’t guarantee 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!


Postcard to Rafa

Postcard to Rafa

TSS creative director David Bartholow shares some of his favorite moments covering Rafael Nadal during the Spanish legend's twilight years.

TSS creative director David Bartholow shares some of his favorite moments covering Rafael Nadal during the Spanish legend's twilight years.

Photography by David Bartholow
November 22, 2024

YOUR WEEK IN TENNIS — SIGN UP FOR THE SECOND SERVE NEWSLETTER


Sin's City

Sin's City

Sin's City

At the ATP Finals, Italians do it better.

At the ATP Finals, Italians do it better.

By Giri Nathan
November 14, 2024

Italian tennis as a whole is surging, and the ambient sensation when you walk among the fans in Turin is Sinnermania. // Getty

Italian tennis as a whole is surging, and the ambient sensation when you walk among the fans in Turin is Sinnermania. // Getty

Last week’s WTA Finals fittingly concluded with a classic between Coco Gauff and Qinwen Zheng that offered everything: three sets, wild scoreboard pressure, a satisfying closure to an odd Coco season, and another bout of legendary iciness from Zheng. Right now, the various rivalries at the top of the WTA are livelier than those at the top of the ATP; there are more matchups to look forward to, and more uncertainty about who will win at any given meeting. Meanwhile, at time of writing, all eight ATP Finals matches have wrapped up in straight sets. And yet—if you were to choose which one to actually go to, as a fan experience? Location matters. Riyadh is an…interesting place. It also does not appear to be much of a tennis fan magnet. The Saudi Public Investment Fund’s incursion into tennis, which now looks inevitable, has presented the tour with a funny trade-off. On the one hand: For the second day of the WTA Finals some 400 fans populated a 5,000-seat stadium. On the other hand: At the end of the tournament Gauff collected $4.8 million, the biggest check in the history of women’s tennis.

But the powers that be could just pick love over money and do everything in Italy. Tennis fans appear to be significantly more eager to assemble in Turin than in Riyadh. You don’t even have to pay them to show up here! The contrast could not be more stark. This is my first trip to the ATP Finals, and these are the best-attended professional tennis matches I’ve ever been at. Hard to spot a single empty seat at any of these sessions in this arena, which I’ve enjoyed as a physical space. Shadowy, metallic, mirrored, menacing, it feels like a tennis tournament conducted inside the Death Star. (If a slightly overzealous Italian DJ had managed to get on the 1s and 2s at the Death Star.) Indoor tennis is fast and loud, and they’ve done it justice with the acoustics and lighting, letting you hear every boom off the strings in this enclosed space. The crowd is kept in near darkness, except for two spotlights on the player boxes, so we can all dial in on every little coach-player exchange. I’m torn on how I feel about the funky lighting cues at critical moments in the matches—match point, set point, even a meager break point—but it does make it feel like we’re all living inside a video game, which perhaps is not the worst thing.

Built for the 2006 Winter Olympics, the arena is starting to show its age in some ways—including, tragically, its bathrooms—but is still a lot of fun to wander around. There’s a real practice court inside the lobby, so you can walk around with your caffè in hand and watch tournament alternates Stefanos Tsitsipas and Grigor Dimitrov chop it up from a few feet away. All over the grounds, kids are playing racquet sports of all kinds: tennis with foam balls, pickleball (sorry), and beach tennis in a sand pit. The food is predictably good, if pricey. Think US Open prices, but at two times US Open quality, and mostly confined to various regional Italian cuisines. And unlike the US Open, it is possible to walk around from point A to point B without feeling like you’re in a rugby scrum.

My biggest surprise was the deeply domestic feel of what is, in theory, an event with big international tourism appeal. Someone with the tournament informed me that proud countrymen scooped up the vast majority of the tickets in the weeks immediately following Jannik Sinner’s win at the Australian Open. Italian tennis as a whole is surging, and the ambient sensation when you walk among the fans in Turin is Sinnermania. It’s the first time I’ve ever experienced a -mania for any ATP player after the Big Three, though admittedly I haven’t been to a tournament in Spain yet to see how mighty Carlitos Alcaraz is treated at home. Because Sinner wasn’t able to play in Rome, this tournament was his grand national welcome for 2024. He received a trophy for locking up year-end world No. 1, the first Italian man to ever do it, with his proud, weepy parents looking on.

He is synonymous with tennis here. Whenever I walk through the crowds, I literally hear the name spoken aloud, even if he’s not playing that day: Seen Air. Jannik’s face is on the lampposts that line the thoroughfares leading up to the venue. During the changeovers in Jannik’s matches, a digital Jannik appears on the screen to advertise coffee. Jannik’s official fox logo is on so many orange caps on so many heads. The crowd requires only the mildest provocation to break into full-fledged “Olé, olé-olé-olé, Seen Air, Seen Air” chants. There are, of course, carrot-themed costumes, and while I think the charm of the Carota Boys as a unit has long since expired, I’m enjoying the improvised setups. I like all the bootleg, unofficial stuff—the neon-orange construction vests, or the elderly gentlemen in orange trucker hats that read “Sinner Seniors.” I wanted to celebrate and applaud the man in a fine dark green suit with a vibrant carrot top dangling at least a foot out of its jacket pocket.

There’s only one more year on the Turin contract; very soon, we’ll find out if it’s staying here, or if it’s going elsewhere in Italy, or if perhaps it’ll be headed to a desolate stadium in a petrostate. If it does leave, I’m going to be taking a lot of focaccia to go.



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!


A Call to Arms

A Call to Arms

A Call to Arms

Elena Rybakina has drifted over this season like a ghost.

Elena Rybakina has drifted over this season like a ghost.

By Giri Nathan
November 8, 2024

Elena Rybakina in Riyadh this week. // Getty

Elena Rybakina in Riyadh this week. // Getty

Aryna Sabalenka, who became the world No. 1 in late October, ensured this week that she would remain the world No. 1 at the end of 2024, a year that’s felt even more dominant than her four titles would suggest. She locked down both hard-court Slams, went deep in the other two, rarely lost early anywhere, and won Cincinnati and Wuhan for good measure. If she capped off the year with another trophy at the WTA Finals—which she’s currently in good position to do—it’d be a fitting end to a season that, in isolation, pretty much secured her fate as a Hall of Famer. But this week, Sabalenka also got a reminder of a familiar old menace. You’d have to go all the way back to…I dunno, four months ago, to remember her name. Sabalenka’s only loss at the WTA Finals thus far was at the hands of Elena Rybakina, a player who has drifted over this season like a ghost, both here and not.

Though the season pleasantly intensified the Iga Swiatek vs. Aryna Sabalenka rivalry, and set them against each other in a down-to-the-wire race for the year-end No. 1 ranking, it all would’ve been even spicier if the third member of the trio had been more present. Elena Rybakina, the stone-faced icon with the biggest serve on the WTA and the punishingly clean ground strokes, started the year on a 30–4 heater that included wins over both her chief rivals on their preferred court surfaces. When all three of these players are healthy, there’s a wildly compelling rock-paper-scissors dynamic playing out at the top of the tour.

But even during that successful stretch, she was dealing with health issues, and they only diversified as the months went on. Over the course of the season, she withdrew or retired from at least 10 events, citing maladies like gastroenteritis, abdominal injury, bronchitis, and, most recently, a lower-back injury that took her out of the US Open and the entire Asian swing. While Rybakina is famously cagey when fielding questions from the press, she was more candid ahead of the WTA Finals, referencing allergies and insomnia as other challenges. Somehow, amid all these interruptions, she won three 500-level titles and put together a strong enough body of work to end the year at No. 5 in the world. This is despite playing just three tournaments after Wimbledon and winning just two matches across them. She and Novak Djokovic—who also qualified for his tour’s year-end finals, but skipped them citing an “ongoing injury” and was recently seen chilling in the Maldives—are surely the best part-time tennis players on the planet.

By her own admission, Rybakina came into the finals without any particular goal in mind: “The level is definitely not at its best. Actually I came without too many expectations. I want to have fun.” And her performance in her first two was as spotty as you’d expect from a player who’d last competed in late August. She lost in straights to Jasmine Paolini, and ran out of gas in the deciding set against Qinwen Zheng. Given that those losses ruled her out of advancing past the group stage, Rybakina’s third match was just for the points, money, and aforementioned fun.  She was to play Sabalenka, who had already secured a semifinal berth, and who had won 17 of her last 18 matches. And, improbably, Rybakina ended her year with a win over the hard-court player du jour, 6–4, 3–6, 6–1; she didn’t lose a point behind her first serve in that final blowout set. Here was one last reminder of her huge talent and, in particular, her calm way of unsettling Sabalenka’s baseline rhythm with her own calm, flat pace.

Looking ahead, there’s plenty of reason for Rybakina optimism in 2025. The biggest news of Rybakina’s year may well have been a personnel matter. The day the US Open draw was released, Rybakina announced that she had sacked Stefan Vukov, the first and only coach of her professional life. I’ve never seen a firing met with such widespread cheer from the broader tennis world. Whatever the internal dynamics—Rybakina publicly defended him from criticism at times—from the outside, it looked like an unusually antagonistic player-coach dynamic, with all of the ire flowing from crabby coach to soft-spoken player. Last week she revealed that she would be replacing Vukov with one of the highest-profile names on the market: Goran Ivanesevic, who completed his highly successful and stressful six-year tour of duty with Djokovic just ahead of the clay season. Ivanesevic said he had lots of offers from top players on both tours but picked Rybakina in part because he could directly relate to her game style: big serve, big hitter, won Wimbledon. If anyone can get Rybakina back into the arms race against Sabalenka and Swiatek, it’s him. That WTA “Big Three” everyone was so excited about—not a mirage. 



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!


Meteor Shower

Meteor Shower

Meteor Shower

Giovanni Mpetshi Perricard joins the ace club.

Giovanni Mpetshi Perricard joins the ace club.

By Giri Nathan
November 1, 2024

GMP serving bombs in Basel, where he won the title. // Getty

GMP serving bombs in Basel, where he won the title. // Getty

One rainy day at Wimbledon I stood in an on-and-off drizzle for several hours and watched the lucky loser Giovanni Mpetshi Perricard take serves. I could say that I watched him play tennis, or more specifically that I watched him play tennis in a first-round match against Sebastian Korda, but it feels more honest to say that I watched him take serves. Because that is what tennis becomes in the hands of the enormous 21-year-old Frenchman: serves. Everything else, like a one-handed backhand and nice volleys, is simply neat accessories for what may well become the single most terrifying shot on the ATP.

After upsetting Korda at Wimbledon with 51 aces, Mpetshi Perricard went on to face Yoshihito Nishioka: 6-foot-8 versus 5-foot-7. Tennis is a great sport precisely because it encompasses such an anatomically diverse field of athletes, but on grass, that one went the way that you’d expect. Three sets wrapped up in 71 minutes; Nishioka groveling bilingually at his box the entire time, simmering in disbelief at Mpetshi Perricard’s meteor-shower serving, until they met at the net for the most visually arresting post-match handshake I’ve seen. Mpetshi Perricard kept going, reaching the fourth round before stalling out. He’d won the 250 at Lyon a few weeks prior; this was something else.

See enough high-level tennis up close in a short span and it’s possible to get desensitized to their extraterrestrial feats. But I’m still always shocked back into appreciation by the true outliers. The weight of shot from an Aryna Sabalenka or Jannik Sinner, the soft touch of an Ons Jabeur or a (heh) Courentin Moutet. Watching Mpetshi Perricard from up close, I knew immediately that this serve belonged in that freakish class. Being 6-foot-8 does a lot of the work, of course, but it still takes sound technique to make the most of those musculoskeletal advantages. GMP has arrived at a clean and efficient method. Low ball toss, light coiling of the body, the racquet floating up slowly, and then a snap. As far as service motions go, this is a quick and violent one, and the results could be similarly described. At time of writing, Mpetshi Perricard has 484 total aces, eighth on tour this season. He trails only Jannik Sinner in percentage of service points won. And he is on top of the tour in terms of ace rate: A staggering 22 percent of his serves go untouched by returners, per Tennis Abstract.

How about those occasions where the ball actually does come back over the net? There’s no ambiguity about what Giovanni wants to do in any given point: end it as quickly as possible. He used to want to emulate the baseline play of his idol Rafa Nadal, but his current coach Emmanuel Planque guided him toward this kill-kill-kill playstyle. “When I have the ball, I want to inflict pain,” Mpetshi Perricard said last week. Despite all that, he is a placid, pleasant presence on court, his disposition as gentle as his serve is evil. He’s also just the latest in a rich tradition. Every generation has its servebots, and this one has been outfitted for the demands of the modern game. Because Mpetshi Perricard is a superior athlete to the prior models—your John Isner, your Ivo Karlovic—his movement is closer to tour average, and his volleys are genuinely great. It’s miraculous that a guy that big can move in the ways that tennis now demands. On the grass, as he decelerated to hit a shot on the run, the sound of his heavy steps on the turf reminded me of the sound of someone beating the dust out of a rug.

But after that breakout Wimbledon run, which earned him a spot in the top 50, Mpetshi Perricard cooled off, losing eight of his next 10 matches. He found his form again last week in Basel, which isn’t surprising. This is the stretch of the calendar he’s going to look forward to every year. For a player with his particular gifts, indoor hard-court season is a boon. No wind to sabotage the ball toss, no sun up above to make you squint—just a consistent environment and quick court surfaces. The greatest servers are known for repeatability, and here they find laboratory conditions. Mpetshi Perricard didn’t lose a single service game in his five matches en route to the title in Basel. In the final he played Ben Shelton, who previously looked like he might have become this generation’s most fearsome server, though he has consciously stopped pushing the mph so as to spare his shoulder, emphasizing serve variety instead. Mpetshi Perricard, meanwhile, is only serving harder and harder as the days pass us by. He’s channeling power so big that he can leave accuracy behind. In the Basel final against Shelton, his average first serve was 138 mph; his average second serve was 131 mph, faster than Shelton’s first. He’s effectively taking two first serves, and when you look at the expected value, it’s a defensible strategy, one that other great servers have toyed with but that no one has taken to such an extreme.

Carlos Alcaraz, who beat GMP in Beijing this month, said it was the best serve on tour, “without doubt.” That’s for the best, because right now, Mpetshi Perricard is also the worst returner in the top 50, by a considerable margin. In his second-round match in Paris this week, the big Frenchman lost to Karen Khachanov. But I would like to direct your attention to the first set of that match, which Mpetshi Perricard won, while winning two return points the entire set, both in the tiebreak. Is this still recognizable as tennis? I don’t know, but I do suspect that he will eventually be a top 10 player in the sport we presently refer to as tennis. Perhaps, before he’s through, they’ll have raised the net a few inches.



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!


Exit a Minor Titan

Exit a Minor Titan

Exit a Minor Titan

Dominic Thiem was a worthy foil for the Big Three–for a while, at least.

Dominic Thiem was a worthy foil for the Big Three–for a while, at least.

By Giri Nathan
October 25, 2024

Dominic Thiem after defeating Roger Federer in the 2019 Indian Wells final. // David Bartholow

Dominic Thiem after defeating Roger Federer in the 2019 Indian Wells final. // David Bartholow

Sometimes time corrects false impressions. This was certainly my experience with Dominic Thiem, who retired this week at the young age of 31, having lost his best tennis well before. Now I worry that his body of work, though decently impressive on paper, might not do justice to his beastly talent. Seven years ago, when I first started writing about this sport, I didn’t really believe in that talent at all.

In summer 2017 I was at the Citi Open Washington D.C., reporting a piece on the future of the men’s tour. I left that tournament with a dim impression of Dominic Thiem: a hapless ball-basher who played too busy a tour schedule and never adjusted his tactics to succeed off of clay courts. This was just a few weeks after a hungover Roger Federer, the morning after winning Wimbledon, had expressed his horror at a younger generation with no net skills to finish points quickly. Perhaps no young player seemed more remote from the net than Thiem, who was then notorious for camping out miles behind the baseline to set up his big ground strokes. I asked Thiem what he thought about Federer’s advice. “Everybody likes to see something different, but nobody is going to change the style of game,” he said, clearly never going to leave his happy place at the back wall of the court. Another example of how inflexible and hardheaded he was, I thought—he’d never make it!

Thiem seemed to me a placeholder, a player of temporary interest until the next true generational player arrived to usher Federer, Rafael Nadal, and Novak Djokovic out of the game. Surely that guy was coming soon. Here he comes. This is the one…or maybe that is the one. But it’ll be any minute now. Right? Year after year passed, prospect after prospect faded, and the Big Three continued to reign. In time I came to grasp just how anomalous those three were, how superior they were to so many successive generations of players, how many potential breakthroughs they managed to quash. And while I came to this realization, the man I’d once dismissed, that stubborn and sedulous ball-basher, kept toiling away. And improving. His blind power got smarter. He found better angles instead of whaling away down the middle. He stepped up into the court when he needed to play a little faster. He expanded his success out from clay to hard courts. He was becoming, if not quite their equal, a constant irritant.

If you consider the 2017–2020 seasons as the final phase of the Big Three era—the last time all three were pretty healthy, clogging up the draw at every big event, winning all the Slams—it’s clear who their worthiest competitor was in that span. It wasn’t Andy Murray, who spent those years ravaged by injury and spiraling toward his first retirement. It was in fact Thiem, who could often hit a peak level defined by overwhelming power and spin, the biggest one-handed backhand since Stan Wawrinka, and a bruising physicality. All that was enough to amass a 16–19 record against the best players ever: 5–2 against Federer, 6–10 against Nadal, 5–7 against Djokovic. Dominic Thiem isn’t as good as Andy Murray, but he is the only player to match the rare feat of having beaten all members of the Big Three at least five times apiece.

Beyond the numbers, I’ll remember the distinctive stamp Thiem put on those matches. His conviction in his own style paid off in the end. Nobody was beating the Big Three with fussy attritional baseline play; it took something bolder and bloodier, a commitment to full power, no second thoughts. And with that burly style of play, Thiem had a knack for epics, for entertaining us in wins and losses alike. His nearly five-hour loss to Nadal in the 2018 US Open quarterfinal is about as close as tennis gets to blood sport. Wins like the one over Federer at Indian Wells in 2019, or the one over Novak Djokovic at the ATP Finals later that year, proved how dangerous he could be when his baseline game was in full flow. “No matter the surface, you always found a way to beat me with your thunderous backhands,” Federer wrote in his tribute to Thiem this week.

Thiem got his lone Slam in 2020, in odd conditions, and faded out almost immediately after. It would take four more seasons before the tour found those long-awaited generational talents, the ones who would finally wrest the game away from that old triad, with Djokovic as their last standing delegate. It was only in 2024 that Jannik Sinner and Carlos Alcaraz took over. And even so, at age 37, playing a part-timer’s schedule and wearing a knee sleeve after a meniscus repair, Djokovic is still good enough to steal away a gold medal and beat pretty much every other player on tour. That’s how hard he is to take down. Having seen how history played out, I’ve come to understand just how unusual it was for Thiem to battle these three guys and come away with an almost 50/50 record. My first impressions were way off. Dominic Thiem wasn’t a lunk, but in fact a minor titan. He didn’t last long, but what he accomplished in his prime was more than the other mortals could manage.



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!


Short Skirts and a Long Life

Short Skirts and a Long Life

Short Skirts and a Long Life

Italian tennis icon Lea Pericoli was known for the flamboyant fashions and gender politics of a bygone era.

Italian tennis icon Lea Pericoli was known for the flamboyant fashions and gender politics of a bygone era.

By Ben Rothenberg
October 18, 2024

Short Skirts and a Long Life

Short Skirts and a Long Life

Italian tennis icon Lea Pericoli was known for the flamboyant fashions and gender politics of a bygone era.

Italian tennis icon Lea Pericoli was known for the flamboyant fashions and gender politics of a bygone era.

By Ben Rothenberg
October 18, 2024

Lea Pericoli in a classic Ted Tinling confection. // Getty

Lea Pericoli in a classic Ted Tinling confection. // Getty

When I got the chance to interview Lea Pericoli five years ago, it felt entirely appropriate that we met in Rome. She’d been Italy’s best women’s tennis player from the late 1950s to the mid-1970s, after all, and sprinkled her perfect English with enthusiastic assents of “Si, bravo” anytime she agreed with what you were saying. 

But perhaps more than just Rome, it was fitting that I met Lea Pericoli within walking distance of the Vatican. Because Lea Pericoli was an icon, and by the time I met her, many would describe her as a relic of a controversial historical force. But I thought of Lea Pericoli more like a patron saint: a guardian and vessel of a certain moment in tennis history and certain values, now perhaps considered retrograde or regrettable. She was the archetype of a time when women realized they had to dress for a show to be seen. 

“A forehand or a backhand don’t get spoiled if you have a pretty dress,” Pericoli told me. “You don’t spoil the game. You just make it a little more pleasant.”

Decades before Billie Jean King would prove that women’s professional sports were a viable concept, only a handful of women were given opportunities to earn money playing sports, and it wasn’t necessarily because they were the best players.

The most lucrative draw in women’s tennis in the early 1950s was Gertrude “Gorgeous Gussie” Moran, a Californian who was on the fringe of the top 10. Moran became a postwar pinup after her appearance at Wimbledon in 1949, when she wore lace-trimmed knickers designed by tennis couturier Ted Tinling.

At buttoned-up Wimbledon, All England Club officials decried Moran for “bringing vulgarity and sin into tennis.” But Moran’s photos went viral, as we’d say now, splashed across front pages around England, America, and the world.  

As reported by Time in November 1950: “Gussie Moran got top billing as the tennis pros opened their winter tour in Manhattan’s Madison Square Garden last week…. [As] a reflection of tennis ability this made no sense, but the pros knew what they were doing.” As top draw, Moran took home 30 percent of the gate at Madison Square Garden.

_________

It was this world, where athleticism and traditional notions of femininity were often considered antithetical, into which Lea Pericoli ascended a few years later. “Sport doesn’t flatter so much a woman,” she told me. “So, you must try to keep being feminine.”

Pericoli’s ethos was just what the male-dominated tennis world was looking for. When the Italian federation sponsored Pericoli to compete at Wimbledon for the first time in 1955, she’d already caused a pretournament stir with her appearance at a warm-up event in Beckenham, getting on the front pages of many British newspapers for her outfit alone, dubbed “Luscious Lea” and “The Lollobrigida of Tennis.” Eager to join forces with this new sensation, Tinling offered to outfit Pericoli for Wimbledon. “It is a great honor, because Tinling only dresses the greatest and most beautiful,” Pericoli later wrote.

Pericoli took court for her first match at Wimbledon decked out in a Tinling creation: a short dress with the shock of a Schiaparelli-pink petticoat underneath, flouting Wimbledon’s strict all-white rules. Photographers scrambled to Court No. 4 to snap photos of her, often lying down to achieve their desired up-skirt angles.

“Gorgeous” Gussie Moran, tennis’ first pinup. // Getty

Lea Pericoli with Italian tennis icon Adriano Panatta // Getty

“Gorgeous” Gussie Moran, tennis’ first pinup. // Getty

Lea Pericoli with Italian tennis icon Adriano Panatta // Getty

“I go out onto the court and all hell breaks loose,” Pericoli recalled. “I have about 20 photographers lying under me. Every move I make causes an infinite series of clicks.”

The circus-like atmosphere unnerved Pericoli, and she lost in three sets. But because of what she’d worn, she was the biggest story at Wimbledon that week. The Daily Herald gushed that Pericoli “lost her contest but found her place in public memory as this year’s femme fatale of fancy-pants…. [The] match is ended, but the lingerie lingers on.” 

Pericoli was initially mortified by how much attention she had attracted. “I lost the match, I was in tears,” she told me. “My father forbade me to play tennis because he was shocked about all the first pages and so on.” So when she returned to court for her doubles match later that week, Pericoli wore a conservative top and pair of shorts from the British brand Fred Perry to deflect any further spotlight. The abandonment of his work infuriated Tinling, who refused to work with her again for years. 

But after the waves she’d made, promoters around the world saw how Pericoli was being covered as “the biggest sensation Wimbledon has seen since Gussie Moran” and began offering her spots in their events. “I wasn’t the strongest player in the world, but with that, I got really wonderful invitations all over the world,” Pericoli told me. “I went to the Caribbean and I went around South America. Just for that. Not so much for my tennis.”

Pericoli “made peace” with Tinling and came to embrace her power as his on-court mannequin, model, and muse. Tinling continued pushing the envelope with Pericoli, and she traveled alongside him to new markets where he hoped to sell his creations, embracing his sense of camp. On a trip to South Africa, for example, Tinling made a gold dress and pair of diamond-studded panties for Pericoli to wear as an homage to the country’s mining industries.

Pericoli assured me that the ostentatious outfits weren’t cumbersome. But sometimes they required mindfulness: Wearing a skirt made of 300 ostrich feathers, as she did once at Wimbledon, meant that you had to wipe a sweaty hand elsewhere, lest you ruffle and muss the delicate design.

Whether it was modeling for Princess Grace Kelly in Monaco or a group of English women at a garden party, Pericoli and Tinling delighted in dazzling their audiences. “I have a little mink skirt, a skirt of swan feathers, a dress made of rose petals, another made of bunches of lily of the valley,” Pericoli wrote in her 1976 memoir Questa Bellissima Vita. “Fringes, sequins, veils. Let’s say that my tailor and I have lost our minds a little. But this will serve to revolutionize clothing in the world of tennis.”

Pericoli was also prudent about what she put on, only wearing her boldest outfits when she believed victory was assured.

“You must be a little careful, because if you go out there with feathers, and you lose, you’re dead because the press will kill you—they will pluck you like a chicken,” she told me. “I always was intelligent enough; I used to know up to what level to dare. When I knew I was going to lose, I just wore a nice little white dress.”

Pericoli and I spoke of two revolutions that followed her in women’s tennis. The first was that previously conservative women’s tennis players began to dress more like her, wearing short skirts or dresses with visible frilly underwear underneath, often designed by Tinling.

Billie Jean King, an advocate for substance over style but also a realist about how to draw eyeballs for her nascent women’s tour, wore many of Tinling’s creations during her career, including during her win over Bobby Riggs in the 1973 Battle of the Sexes.  

“Fashion really reflects where women were, and the lack of freedom we had with our bodies and with sports, how restrictive society was for women through fashion,” King told me a few years ago. “Fashion tells you where people are, how things loosened up over time.”

The second revolution we discussed was the one led by King—whom Pericoli was proud to mention she had once beaten on a clay court in Gstaad in 1969—to make women’s tennis a viable, and eventually hugely lucrative, career opportunity.

“I think it’s amazing,” Pericoli told me as we discussed the many millionaire players in the modern women’s game. “And I’m very glad for them because I never would have thought in my life that a miracle like this would have happened…. Billie managed to lead this kind of rebellion.”

As we sat in a small garden at the Foro Italico between courts Pietrangeli and Centrale, though, Pericoli made clear, perhaps unsurprisingly given her earlier generation, that she didn’t cosign everything King had stood for. “I’ve never been—come si dice—a feminist,” she told me. 

By leaning into her ability to draw attention for her outfits, Pericoli had worked within the patriarchy rather than against it. “Now I think it’s even too exaggerated, you know, to have the same kind of prize money,” she told me. “I will be very unpopular with this, but I don’t think that in the world we are living now, in this time, that women can complain…. I don’t want to be like a man. I don’t want equality…. That’s why I don’t like women liberation, you know. Very dangerous. Very dangerous. You mustn’t have an enemy when you see a man.”

_________

Though she never reached a major quarterfinal in singles, Pericoli kept playing into her 40s, even after battling cancer. From the 1980s through the 2010s, she served as a master of ceremonies at the Foro Italico. She also worked for a Milanese newspaper, writing about tennis and fashion.

Pericoli remained ready to be seen at tennis courts throughout her life. She was formally made an ambassador for women’s tennis by the Federation of Italian Tennis (FIT) in 2004, and her platinum coiffure was unmissable in her front-row seat of Court Centrale. She put in long hours watching tennis in the sun well into her 80s. “Because it would be horrible to have a front-row seat and not to be sitting there,” Pericoli told me. “At least for politeness. It’s a big pleasure, but also a little duty that you must show respect, you know?”

The respect was reciprocated by the tournament: In 2018, the Foro Italico opened a new on-site restaurant, with walls painted bright pink, named “Lea” in her honor. 

When we met in 2019, during a brief respite from her front seat, Pericoli wore a crisp white pantsuit and Tiffany & Co. glasses. She was 84 but still nimble and still sharp in her second language. “My life is fantastic,” she told me. “I like this role of being an ambassador for Italian tennis, and I enjoy life. It’s wonderful. The only shame is that it will end, unfortunately. I would like for it to be a little longer, for my taste.”

Lea Pericoli, with short skirts and a long life, passed away on Oct. 4, 2024. She was 89.

Vintage Pericoli. // Getty

Vintage Pericoli. // Getty

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


Oh, Sister

Oh, Sister

Oh, Sister

Siblings Mirra and Erika Andreeva clash for the first time, in Wuhan.

Siblings Mirra and Erika Andreeva clash for the first time, in Wuhan.

By Giri Nathan
October 10, 2024

Erika Andreeva during her Round of 32 match against sister Mirra in Wuhan this week. // Getty

Erika Andreeva during her Round of 32 match against sister Mirra in Wuhan this week. // Getty

Younger siblings are usually the better tennis players, aren’t they? What a structural advantage, to spend so many formative years hitting with someone older and better, honing those ground strokes with pure spite and a hunger for affirmation. Can’t teach that.

Erika Andreeva is an excellent tennis player, ranked No. 70 in the world as a 20-year-old. If only she didn’t have to compete on the same professional plane as her 17-year-old sister, Mirra, one of the WTA’s best prodigies in more than a decade. This week, Mirra rose to No. 19 in the world, which made her the youngest player to enter the top 20 since Nicole Vaidasova did it in 2006. Teenage stardom has grown scarcer as the sport has gotten more physically taxing, but Mirra is the rare player with the technical chops to already beat veterans at this embryonic stage, without much of a serve. Mirra also seems to peak at the biggest tournaments, as proven by her incredible 15–7 record at Slams; she made the Roland-Garros semifinal this year by absorbing the power of Aryna Sabalenka. Mirra is bubbly and funny in interviews, and also slightly terrifying. “Fourth round is nothing,” she said, immediately after arriving at that stage of the Australian Open earlier this year. What kind of 16-year-old says that? Only one intent on crushing everything in her path.

Unfortunately for Mirra, it was her sibling Erika who appeared in her path for their second-round match in Wuhan on Wednesday. The two sisters were coming at the match from quite different angles: Erika lost in the qualifying rounds and only slipped into the main draw as a lucky loser; Mirra was slotted in as the No. 16 seed. While there are a couple pairs of siblings on tour, they haven’t recently collided. The WTA’s most recent sister matchup is still its most iconic: Venus and Serena, in 2020, at the modest Lexington tournament. (Serena won it, ending her career with a 19–12 all-time edge.)

The Wuhan match was unfamiliar territory for the sisters Andreeva. It wasn’t just that they hadn’t yet played each other in an official pro setting. Mirra said that she and Erika hadn’t even played a casual practice match in “three or five years.” That’s because they seem to struggle to find a “casual” register as far as tennis is concerned. The siblings have intentionally resolved not to talk about tennis off the court, and while they do practice together, they never play points, sets, or matches. It unnerves them: “For example, if she does a lot of mistakes or I see she’s unhappy or worried, I start to be worried for her, then I cannot play normally. When she sees that some bad stuff happens to me, she cannot play normally, she cannot practice,” said Mirra, who previewed this matchup as a “nightmare.” When they were kids, Erika always won their sets, Mirra said last year; Erika countered by observing that the age difference is far more consequential at a young age. Now Mirra is the taller one and has enjoyed greater overall success as a pro. Maybe these facts would give her the edge she lacked as a tot.

Or maybe not. Just as Serena lost her first five matches against Venus before taking control of the rivalry, the junior Andreeva might still be coming up against a decade-old mental block. Mirra has the occasional fiery moment on court, but for the most part I’m astonished by how well she holds her composure in huge matches. Still, there’s nothing like a deep-seated family rivalry to make a tennis player revert to their actual tiny age. Though she had a break point to go up 4–1 in the first set, Mirra lost the set 3–6 from there and promptly blasted a ball into the stands in frustration. In the second set Erika took over, claiming her third match point to win 6–3, 6–1 in a mere 90 minutes. There was no visible celebration, just a sober and sincere hug at the net.

Apparently their deep familiarity with each other’s games turned the contest into a kind of game-theoretic puzzle. “I know where she will most possibly go, and she as well,” said Erika after her win. “Sometimes during the rally I was like, ‘Normally I go there, but I know that she knows that I go there,’ and I changed my decision. I’m not sure that was the best choice sometimes.” Overall, though, Erika clearly made enough of the right calls to take the edge in what will hopefully be a long-running head-to-head. I say “hopefully” for the tennis fans—there were some really wonderful rallies in this one—if not for the Andreeva nuclear family. At least the sisters worked out an arrangement ahead of their stressful contest: They decided to split their prize money from the second round. Sharing is caring, now and forever.



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!


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!