Why Djokovic is the real world No 1 ahead of Alcaraz, tennis should not be seen as basketball for the fans - Match Points #43
In the latest episode of Match Points, our panel debates about the world n°1 spot battle between Novak Djokovic and Carlos Alcaraz and also discuss the Sunshine Doubles.
Category
🥇
SportsTranscript
00:00 (upbeat music)
00:02 And welcome to a brand new edition of Match Points
00:08 here on TennisMajors.com,
00:10 where we gather together to debate and discuss
00:12 the biggest topics in tennis.
00:13 This is the post slam edition, if you will,
00:16 Indian Wells and of course, Miami Open.
00:19 So we're in that good time of the year,
00:20 the weather's getting better,
00:21 tennis is getting interesting.
00:23 Say hello to our panel as always,
00:25 there he is, the journalist and of course,
00:27 writer and author, Ben Rothenberg.
00:29 Also journalist, writer and one of those guys in tennis,
00:33 stay on his good side, Simon Cambers.
00:35 And last but not least, tennis journalist and of course,
00:39 player and Wimbledon champion 2013, Marian Bartoli.
00:43 All right gang, let's get right at it.
00:45 Between Carlos Alcarez, winner at Indian Wells
00:48 and semi-finalist in Miami,
00:50 and then Novak Djokovic, absent from the Sunshine Double,
00:53 who do you believe in your opinion
00:56 is the true world number one?
00:58 Let us begin with Marian Bartoli.
01:01 - Well, it's very simple, it's Novak Djokovic,
01:03 just simply because he won again at the Australian Open
01:05 and he just couldn't participate in the Sunshine.
01:09 He just couldn't play in Indian Wells, Miami
01:10 and we all know the reasons why.
01:12 So I'm not saying that Carlos Alcarez
01:14 didn't deserve to do all the results he has done.
01:16 He obviously played tremendous tennis
01:19 and especially that match against Sinner,
01:21 even though he lost it at the end.
01:22 I think for me, that first set
01:24 was one of the best tennis sets I've ever seen.
01:26 The level was just absolutely insane
01:29 and it's great to see that those kids are taking over
01:32 and making sure that the ATP
01:34 has a really bright for sure ahead,
01:36 even though when Rafa and Novak are gonna retire,
01:38 they will be the next superstars.
01:41 But for now you have one guy that has 22 grand slam,
01:43 another one that has one grand slam.
01:45 So it's very easy to say who is number one.
01:47 But I'm really looking forward to the clay
01:49 and of course Wimberdon ahead as well
01:51 to see when both of them will be able to play those events.
01:54 If they go toe to toe, who will be the best?
01:57 - All right, Ben Rothenberg, same question.
01:59 Who is your true world number one?
02:01 - I think I would pick Djokovic also.
02:02 I mean, he is the actual number one right now
02:03 in the rankings, he got it back.
02:05 And I think it's closer than Mary made it sound though,
02:06 just because I mean, Alcarez didn't play Australia.
02:09 So there really have been ships passing
02:11 in the night completely.
02:12 And it's been very strange
02:13 that I've been trading back this number one ranking
02:15 without playing each other
02:16 or even being at the same tournament
02:17 or on the same continent for this long.
02:20 And I just saw Alcarez is out of Monte Carlo now.
02:22 So it's gonna be even longer
02:24 that we're waiting for these two to meet each other,
02:26 which is very frustrating on a fan level
02:27 to have this sort of duel for number one,
02:29 but not actually have them playing each other.
02:31 It's very rare for ATP.
02:32 I feel like that happens sometimes on WTA
02:34 where like Osaka and Barty, for example,
02:37 would be trading back number one,
02:38 but not playing each other very much.
02:40 This is kind of the same thing happening to the men now
02:42 for all these circumstances of Alcarez's injuries
02:46 and Djokovic's continuing not being vaccinated
02:48 and having the travel problems he's having.
02:50 So we'll see.
02:51 I mean, I do think Djokovic,
02:53 if they were to play each other on a clay court,
02:55 you know, in Madrid, let's say,
02:56 I think I would pick Djokovic.
02:58 Although Alcarez did beat him there last year.
03:01 I think it's gonna be very close.
03:01 I just hope more than anything
03:03 that they play each other more and more.
03:04 I hope that they get a chance to build up
03:06 a bit of a rivalry
03:07 because this is a real torch passing generational moment
03:10 that could be really good for the continuity of the sport
03:12 to have Alcarez, if he does become the next number one,
03:15 earn it with a few victories head to head
03:17 in the biggest tournaments over Djokovic.
03:19 - Fair enough.
03:20 Simon, who do you have as your true, if you will,
03:23 world number one?
03:24 - Well, Novak's world number one because he is number one.
03:26 There's no getting around that.
03:27 He won Wimbledon.
03:28 He won the Australian Open.
03:30 As Ben said, I mean, you know,
03:31 they haven't played each other.
03:32 So if you're asking who's the better player,
03:35 that's a different question.
03:36 You know, who's the better player right now
03:38 and who you would pick if they were to play each other
03:40 on any given surface is really up in the air.
03:42 I think Alcaraz is taking the game to a new level,
03:47 dragging a few other people along with him.
03:49 But who's to say that Novak won't be able to take care
03:52 of him when they play each other.
03:53 I'm looking forward to the clay.
03:54 It's a shame Alcaraz can't play Monte Carlo,
03:57 but you know, come Roland Garros, if he's fully fit,
04:00 if Novak's fully fit, if Rafa's fully fit,
04:02 then it could be something really special.
04:04 But right now, Novak's number one.
04:06 The way the ranking system is,
04:07 it's skewed towards the slams.
04:09 He's won two of them.
04:11 Alcaraz has won one.
04:12 So it's no surprise really that Novak should be number one.
04:16 - Well, I just want to add that Djokovic
04:17 doesn't have any points for Wimbledon too
04:18 in all this equation.
04:19 So he'd be way ahead for number one
04:20 if he had points for his Wimbledon title.
04:22 - All right, gentlemen and lady, we'll move along.
04:24 Rafa Nadal has won only one match in 2023
04:27 and has not played since the Australian Open.
04:29 He's out, as we said, for Monte Carlo
04:31 for the second year in a row.
04:33 Are you worried about Rafa for the French Open
04:36 and also for the remainder of his career?
04:39 Are you concerned?
04:41 And if so, how much?
04:42 Ben, you're nodding already.
04:43 - Yeah, I certainly mean he's getting older.
04:44 At some point it has to stop.
04:46 And I think Rafa made us all look kind of silly
04:48 when last year he lost in Rome to Shapovalov,
04:51 I think in the second or third round of Rome.
04:53 And he was having trouble walking
04:55 and it's like, "Oh, I'm in really bad shape.
04:57 "I can't win."
04:57 And it was finally, "Okay, finally it's over for Rafa.
05:00 "The day isn't near."
05:01 And then he wins the French Open with no problem at all
05:04 and crushes Roode in the final
05:05 and beats Djokovic on the way and stuff.
05:07 So it's never going to confidently bet out at all,
05:10 but eventually, eventually time is undefeated
05:13 and eventually there will come an end for Rafa.
05:15 And his last results since that French Open title,
05:17 or since Wimbledon withdrawal really,
05:19 when he withdrew from the semifinal,
05:20 his results have been really bad.
05:22 I mean, he's just not winning very many matches.
05:23 He's losing a lot.
05:24 He's lost a lot to Americans, which he never used to do,
05:26 which has been very strange for this country,
05:27 beating the doll constantly all of a sudden.
05:30 So yeah, I think that, I'm concerned.
05:34 I do think the end is possibly near
05:36 and we'll get signs probably early.
05:38 Well, maybe not early
05:38 'cause it's always his best at the French.
05:40 I don't think you can rule him out
05:41 until he's actually lost the best of five match
05:43 at the French.
05:43 I think he always has that possibility
05:45 to win that tournament just based on his history there
05:48 and the magic he can produce there.
05:49 But I think it's less likely than ever,
05:52 I'll say that at this point,
05:53 that he's gonna win another French Open.
05:54 - Simon, how concerned are you?
05:56 - Yeah, a little concerned.
05:57 I mean, when you saw the injury that he got
06:00 at the Australian Open, it was his hip flexor almost.
06:04 I mean, he couldn't hit a backhand after that.
06:05 And I think the shots we've seen of him practicing,
06:09 I haven't seen a single backhand.
06:10 It's mostly just, it's almost all forehands.
06:13 So he's clearly not ready yet.
06:14 But then again, he did say, even in Australia,
06:16 that Monte Carlo was a push.
06:18 It might be Barcelona, it might be Madrid.
06:21 If you look at the last few years
06:22 of what Nadal's done on clay,
06:24 in the buildup to Roland Garros,
06:26 he's not been brilliant in those tournaments.
06:28 He's not been at his best physically or sometimes mentally.
06:32 So I wouldn't be gravely concerned,
06:36 but I am concerned because, as Ben said,
06:39 he's 36, coming on 37.
06:41 His body's been through the ringer
06:43 time and time and time again.
06:44 Somewhere along the line, it will catch up with him
06:47 and he won't be able to do what he's done
06:49 for 14 times at Roland Garros.
06:51 But I still wouldn't put it past him
06:53 because if he does come back in Madrid or Rome
06:55 or Barcelona even, then he's still got time to get there.
06:59 And beating him over five sets at Roland Garros
07:02 is something that so few people have been able to do
07:05 over the years that, you know,
07:07 he's still well capable of doing it.
07:09 It's just that we don't know what kind of shape he's in
07:11 and how deep that injury is, how bad it's been,
07:15 when he's going to come back.
07:16 And yeah, of course there's going to be concern.
07:18 It's just a shame not to see him in Monte Carlo.
07:20 I said earlier today, it just feels a bit wrong.
07:22 You know, he's won that tournament so many times,
07:24 it's part of the fabric.
07:26 Not being there is a shame,
07:27 but you know, you just wish him to get back
07:29 and give it a chance to be 100% at Roland Garros.
07:32 - Martin, same question.
07:33 How concerned are you for Rafa
07:36 with this upcoming French Open
07:38 and for the remainder of what does remain
07:40 of this legendary career?
07:42 - I'm on the exact same page as Simon.
07:44 The only thing I will add,
07:46 because everything has been said,
07:47 is last year I've been very lucky
07:49 to be a lot of his match court side.
07:51 So when really you're by the flowers on Courtfield Châtelier
07:54 and you can sense everything,
07:56 the intensity, the fatigue, the pain,
08:00 and also how much he can raise his game.
08:03 And I will always remember I was sitting there
08:06 for the match against Sasha Zverev
08:07 and the match against Novak Djokovic.
08:09 And I was just keeping on telling to myself,
08:12 you just can't hit Rafa on that court.
08:14 It's just almost impossible.
08:16 He was just defending, almost hitting with his racket,
08:20 the lines just behind him.
08:22 And he makes the court so small for the opponents.
08:25 And obviously all of you guys remember
08:27 the match against Zverev
08:28 when Zverev was playing incredible tennis.
08:30 That match was set to go for like six hours marathon.
08:33 And obviously the twist of the ankle happened to Sasha,
08:36 but the intensity that he's capable of putting on that court
08:41 it's something I never saw him doing elsewhere.
08:44 I think there is something special
08:46 about this Courtfield Châtelier.
08:47 I think it's all about the history, how much he has won,
08:50 how much confident that court is giving him
08:52 that I don't think we can rate him off yet.
08:55 And as long as he is in the draw to play in Roland Garros,
09:01 I think he goes there as a favorite.
09:03 And I think Novak and everyone would agree to that.
09:06 Now it's obviously about how much match you have
09:09 in your legs, because even if you're Rafael Nadal,
09:11 you need some sort of stamina.
09:13 You need to be able to have, you know,
09:15 few matches you can look at and say,
09:17 "Okay, I've been able to sustain three sets.
09:19 I'll be able to sustain three hours."
09:21 Because otherwise, if you go into Grand Slam,
09:23 knowing that those kids like Alkara, Senior,
09:26 not even talking about Novak Djokovic,
09:28 but they're going to go out at him full out.
09:30 And he will need to be able to sustain that pace
09:32 for a long period of time.
09:33 And obviously we saw that the Austrian Open,
09:35 which is the body, can't cope with that anymore.
09:38 So my question is there, you know,
09:41 does he have enough in terms of buildup
09:44 to be able to sustain the pace
09:46 that is just harder and harder those days?
09:48 - Well, I just want to add something more positive.
09:49 I mean, he just ended very recently his streak
09:51 of being in the top 10 for almost 18 years consecutively,
09:55 never leaving the top 10, which, I mean,
09:57 I was in high school the last time Rafael Nadal
09:59 was not in the top 10.
10:01 So it's really, it's an incredible whole generation,
10:04 lifetime away that he's been there
10:05 and that fixture, despite all of the injury breaks he's had,
10:07 he's always kept a foot there.
10:09 So he's almost certainly not going to be in the top 10
10:10 when the French Open comes around this time,
10:12 unless he, you know, wins Monte Carlo
10:14 and Madrid or something.
10:16 So that also will change his seating.
10:17 He could play someone like Djokovic, you know,
10:19 in the fourth round, potentially,
10:21 if he's one of those 13 through 16 seats,
10:23 which seems very possible.
10:25 So that's going to be different,
10:26 or Alkara in the fourth round, or Medvedev even,
10:28 or whoever else is in the top four seats.
10:31 It's going to be a different road than usual
10:32 for Nadal at that tournament.
10:35 - Yeah, when we talk about records in sports,
10:37 that consecutive top 10 streak feels almost untouchable
10:40 in a day and age in which I don't know
10:42 if anyone can emulate that.
10:43 Let's flip quickly over to the women's side, shall we?
10:47 The question here being asked of us by our producers is,
10:50 can Svantek, Sabalenka, and Rybakina,
10:53 can they become the big three of women's tennis?
10:56 And if not, tell me which of those three
10:59 you believe does not belong.
11:01 Eventually, we'll prove to not belong.
11:04 And Marianne, we'll come to you first.
11:06 - My God, women's tennis,
11:07 how to predict something nowadays.
11:09 I mean, this is almost unpredictable.
11:11 But I would think, based on what Rybakina and Sabalenka
11:14 has been able to show us
11:16 since the beginning of the year on the hard court,
11:19 and obviously Rybakina last year at Wimbledon,
11:21 I think on the fast surfers,
11:23 definitely they're part of the conversation,
11:25 and Iga is just very consistent.
11:28 Obviously, she didn't win a slab,
11:29 she didn't win the Australian Open,
11:30 she didn't win anything in the sunshine,
11:32 even though she has to pull out of Miami,
11:34 but she's there in the conversation every time.
11:36 She gets really consistent results.
11:38 Now on clay, you have to put Iga as first, absolutely.
11:41 And then that's where I'm doubting slightly more
11:43 the results of Sabalenka and Rybakina on clay,
11:46 based on the surfers and then game style.
11:48 And I think some other girls can be part of the mix.
11:51 I'm thinking about Crescicova.
11:52 Obviously, she has won a round of girls in the past.
11:55 I'm thinking about Paula Badoza.
11:56 If she's able to get some form
11:58 and some sort of confidence back into her game,
12:00 she can be a really good clay quarter.
12:01 Maria Sacari.
12:02 I think on the clay specifically,
12:04 there's just more girls into the conversation.
12:07 I think on the hard and grass and general fast surfers,
12:10 these top three look to me as the most consistent
12:13 and overall the girls that you will find,
12:16 you know, consistently on the semifinal and onwards.
12:18 - Simon, can they become the big three of women's tennis?
12:20 And if not, who do you have as the odd woman out?
12:24 - They could be, but it's way too early to say.
12:27 I mean, they need to show it for a year or two.
12:30 Okay, Svantek is doing it.
12:31 It's a year today, I think, as we record,
12:33 that she's been number one in the world,
12:35 which is a great achievement.
12:37 Sapolenko Tsoysta has served very well
12:41 to get that Australian Open title.
12:43 Rybakina looks very at home on fast surfaces.
12:46 I would worry about her on clay a little
12:49 because her forehand is still a bit funky.
12:51 And, you know, if she has to create pace,
12:53 that's when she struggles.
12:55 Backhand is excellent and serve, obviously, massive weapon.
12:59 Krzyzczyka, very big threat on clay.
13:00 I would put Coco Goff in there.
13:03 You know, finalist in Paris last year.
13:05 Clay sort of suits her, strangely,
13:07 'cause you would have thought Hardcourtson does,
13:09 but she's at home on the clay court.
13:11 And there are others, you know,
13:13 Jessie Pigula is very consistent.
13:15 So I think there'll be chops and changes over the time.
13:18 I don't think, I think it's too early to say
13:20 that they could be the big three in the same kind of way
13:25 as obviously we had with Federer, Nadal, and Djokovic.
13:27 - Okay, so Ben, if you had to predict a big three
13:30 in the future of women's tennis,
13:31 who are you putting in that three?
13:32 - Well, I just wanna sort of follow
13:33 what Simon was saying on the defining what big three means.
13:36 I mean, the big three in men's tennis was three guys
13:38 who all won at least 20 grand slams.
13:41 So I think we're setting the bar much lower
13:43 for what the current WTA is going to have,
13:46 just because obviously 20 for anybody
13:47 is a ridiculous expectation,
13:48 much less the three people are gonna do it the same way.
13:50 But yes, they could be,
13:51 it would be great to have these three competing
13:53 for the titles and they have won
13:54 all the recent grand slams between them.
13:56 And it's interesting and it's been great.
13:58 We talked about how Alkaraz and Djokovic
14:00 have not been playing each other this year.
14:01 We've had multiple matches and big finals
14:03 between Sabalenka and Rabakina this year,
14:06 and I'll show you up in Indian Wells,
14:07 which has been great to have those sort of rivalries
14:09 developing, that's what you need.
14:10 And that's what women's tennis has been missing
14:12 is having the same players play each other over and over
14:15 in a short period of time to build up those rivalries.
14:17 And so that's been really great to see.
14:19 And yeah, so those two have been the best two
14:20 of this year so far.
14:22 And then certainly, Svantek is still the number one
14:25 and was so, so good last year
14:26 that she's in the conversation as well.
14:28 I think she just had the worst 2023 so far
14:31 of the three of them actually, Svantek.
14:32 But we assume that the injury will get better.
14:34 We assume that Clay will bring out everything for her,
14:36 but it's gonna be different.
14:37 It's different defending all these points
14:39 she's gonna be defending, being champion in Rome,
14:42 French Open, US Open.
14:44 It's gonna be a different sort of pressure for her,
14:45 especially maybe if Sabalenka wins a title or two more
14:48 and is closing in on the actual number one ranking.
14:51 We'll see how Svantek responds to that.
14:52 But I think, yeah, I feel pretty good about this
14:54 as a sort of clear top three.
14:56 I think there's a big gap between these three
14:58 and the rest of the field.
14:59 And Krejcikova, I think, is the number four right now,
15:02 sort of in the power rankings that would have.
15:03 - All right, moving on now.
15:04 In Forbes Magazine, Francis Tiafoe said
15:07 that to bring new fans to the game of tennis,
15:09 the public should be allowed to move around
15:11 and talk in the stands during matches,
15:14 much like they do in basketball.
15:16 Jessica Bogula agreed with this idea.
15:19 Coco Gauff said she was not one to complain about noise.
15:23 The question is, do you support this idea
15:26 of allowing fans to come and go
15:28 and that type of noise in the stands during tennis matches?
15:31 Marianne Bartoli, you played the game.
15:33 You tell us, good idea for 2023 and forward, yes or no?
15:37 - I have a tough time with that.
15:38 Basketball is completely different.
15:39 You keep on going in and out as a player.
15:41 It's a team sport.
15:43 It's not the same at all as being individually on the court,
15:46 having to focus, point in and point out for five sets
15:49 if you're a guy, three sets if you're a girl in a Grand Slam.
15:52 I just think, you know, already,
15:55 especially before the point,
15:57 I think before the point is acceptable
15:58 to have someone moving, after the point, it's just,
16:01 I mean, when the point started,
16:02 it just gets really difficult
16:03 because you have to stay focused on the ball
16:06 and obviously everything coming into your vision
16:08 is a distraction.
16:09 So that will become a lot more difficult to accept.
16:12 So I have the feeling if obviously it's an exhibition,
16:17 if it's a match that doesn't come down
16:18 to a Grand Slam level or anything like this,
16:20 of course you get the fan, you get some music,
16:22 you get some sort of interaction.
16:23 But if you're, for me, in my opinion,
16:27 in a match that is an official match,
16:29 I just don't see it at all.
16:30 I mean, the dynamic in a basketball match
16:33 is completely different to a tennis match.
16:35 I think it would be way too many distractions.
16:38 And where do you stop?
16:39 And where do you put the limit from everyone and talking?
16:41 And then you have 15,000 people talking at the same time
16:44 during a tennis match.
16:45 It's just not possible.
16:46 So I just, I mean, I understand the soft idea,
16:49 but I think as a reality, it just doesn't fit.
16:53 - Simon Camber, same question.
16:55 Allowing people to come and go,
16:57 allowing talking in the stands, is this good for tennis?
16:59 Would this allow for new fans?
17:01 Or as Marion said, just won't work.
17:03 - I mean, maybe I'm just getting old,
17:04 but I just think it's a lot of rubbish, really.
17:06 I mean, what's the point?
17:08 What actually are you trying to add to the game
17:10 by letting people courtside,
17:12 being able to mill around and talk
17:14 and do whatever they like?
17:15 People talk anyway.
17:17 It's a little, you know, there's a bit of noise going around.
17:19 Players can handle that.
17:20 But if people are actually moving around
17:22 and shouting at each other and whatever,
17:25 it's just gonna interrupt the game and reduce the quality.
17:27 And nobody wants that.
17:29 I would say that when you're, you know,
17:31 some of the stadiums around the world, I think,
17:33 have it right.
17:34 You know, with the sort of middle layer upwards,
17:36 people can walk around.
17:38 You can, like Ash Stadium, like, what are the,
17:42 is it Margaret Court now in Australia?
17:44 I think it's those courts where you can view
17:46 from halfway up and move around.
17:49 And the noise that you make there doesn't matter
17:50 because you're not in the eyeline.
17:52 You're not a distraction.
17:53 You are adding to it.
17:54 It is a good atmosphere.
17:55 So if I was designing stadiums now,
17:59 you know, in terms of future stadiums,
18:00 I would look for something like that.
18:02 I don't think there's any need to shake it up
18:04 so close to the court, because as Marion said,
18:06 you know, on a basketball court,
18:07 the players can't really see the crowd anyway
18:09 'cause their own teams and squads are sat courtside,
18:13 almost standing up half the time right there anyway.
18:15 So it's not like their vision is an issue.
18:18 It's, you know, in tennis, it's such a unique sport
18:21 in the way you have to really, really focus on.
18:24 And if someone's moving in your eyeline
18:25 when you're about to hit a volley or whatever
18:27 and you're on the move, it really would distract,
18:30 I think, from the product.
18:31 So that's the way I'd go.
18:33 I would first change a lot of things to make it
18:35 so you can move around more.
18:37 For example, I think it's terrible
18:38 when stadiums don't let fans in after,
18:42 when they can wait three games after a set, basically.
18:44 So if you're a second late coming back
18:46 from the bathroom between sets or something,
18:48 you can have to wait sometimes regularly 20 or more minutes
18:51 to have three games to complete
18:53 before you can get to your seat.
18:54 That's robbing ticket-buying fans of a lot of tennis,
18:57 and sometimes a whole half a set.
18:59 It's a very long time to wait.
19:00 So I would let fans enter and refine their seats
19:02 after every game, at least,
19:04 which would be not just the changeovers,
19:06 but give them 30 seconds to go get to their seats
19:08 every time, and these are people who paid
19:10 to watch the matches and to keep them waiting
19:12 in the wings for so long.
19:13 I don't think it's right.
19:14 If the players need to stand around for 10 more seconds
19:16 between games to let people sit down, so be it.
19:19 It doesn't bother me.
19:19 I think that's the number one thing I would change
19:21 in terms of fan regulation and restriction.
19:24 And then, yeah, I think most of the visual parts,
19:28 and Maren, correct me if I'm wrong,
19:29 I think it's fairly specific parts of a stadium
19:31 that really will bother the player when they're there.
19:34 So you can make it clear that a lot of the stadium
19:37 is going to be okay to move around to get your seat,
19:38 to go to the bathroom, to stand and stretch,
19:41 whatever you want to do between points,
19:43 but have ushers in fairly specific zones,
19:46 like splash zones at SeaWorld,
19:47 certain areas of the stadium where movement
19:50 is more strictly enforced.
19:52 I think that would be the way to do it.
19:53 But definitely, 100%, let the fans come in
19:56 between every game, because keeping these long lines
19:58 of people waiting for three games,
20:00 especially at the beginning of the set,
20:01 and then even sometimes two games later on the set
20:03 can be very long, can be over 10 minutes often.
20:06 So let those people in more often is my main fix.
20:09 - All right, so let's shift from the "Forbes" magazine story
20:12 to an article from the "Players Tribune."
20:14 Just before International Women's Day,
20:16 Denis Shapovalov calling for equal pay
20:19 between professional tennis men's and women's sides.
20:24 Do you believe this could be accomplished?
20:26 And if so, how do you accomplish this?
20:30 Let's begin, Simon Cambers.
20:32 - Yeah, there you go.
20:35 That's it.
20:36 The tours just need to sort it out.
20:39 You know, it's the age-old problem in tennis
20:41 of having seven governing bodies
20:44 that need to talk to each other to sort this out.
20:46 Yeah, there is absolutely no reason now
20:50 why men and women should not be paid the same
20:53 if they're playing the same tournament.
20:54 And if you're, if it's a Cincinnati
20:57 and the men and women are there, pay them the same.
21:00 Absolutely.
21:02 I don't even see it as a talking point, to be honest.
21:04 It just should be done.
21:05 What is interesting, just sorry.
21:08 What was interesting and sort of quite telling
21:11 and not that surprising is that Denis Shapovalov,
21:14 who I really like, only really realized
21:16 that what's happened in tennis
21:18 after his girlfriend told him.
21:20 You know, whereas it's not difficult to see,
21:23 but it's nice that he learned it after she told him.
21:26 - Ammarian, anything to add to this conversation?
21:29 - No, I mean, I'm a true advocate of that
21:31 for more than 20 years.
21:34 When you meet Billie Jean King,
21:35 she will just open your eyes.
21:37 I mean, and it's just from women like that
21:39 who paved the way for all of us
21:41 to start to have more than what we used to have
21:44 at the beginning.
21:45 And even my era, if you take the same results
21:48 and you put it this year,
21:49 you will earn so much more than what we were earning.
21:52 I played roughly from 2000, 2013, that decade,
21:56 we didn't earn the same money as the girls are earning now
21:59 and good for them.
22:00 I mean, this is what we're looking for
22:02 is just to get more and more to the players.
22:05 And I think I would add to the conversation
22:07 a point that Novak Djokovic made,
22:09 which I think it's very true.
22:11 It's only 400, 500 people can leave out from tennis.
22:15 You can put 250 on the woman's side,
22:18 250 on the men's side,
22:20 because you can qualify for the Grand Slam qualification
22:23 who gives you sort of enough,
22:25 a little bit of a lift financially
22:27 to make it through a year.
22:29 We're a sport that generate one,
22:31 more than 1 billion people watching.
22:33 And I think more than only 500 people
22:35 should be able to make a living of their sports
22:38 when you have more than 1 billion fan base.
22:40 I think it's a broader conversation that we need to have,
22:44 not only having equal price money for men and women,
22:46 which is for me a given and something that is so clear,
22:49 but obviously we take time from the sponsor point of view,
22:52 because I tried to organize a tournament in Paris,
22:55 a WTA even 500.
22:57 And when you talk to sponsors
22:59 and you pitch them a WTA event,
23:01 they're just not interested.
23:02 That is a pure heart, true fact.
23:05 And it's how much we can change those mentalities
23:08 because then we always look and say,
23:10 oh yeah, but you know,
23:10 if you come with the men's side as well,
23:12 then we might invest in both
23:14 because we get the men's side of it.
23:16 I will not mention the sponsor
23:17 because I'm not here to sort of, you know,
23:19 point it out to certain people,
23:20 but that's the reality.
23:22 And that's reality that we have to face.
23:25 It's something that we still take some stride
23:27 and that we take a lot of effort
23:28 to make those mentality change.
23:30 And obviously, billy drinking
23:31 has been that driving force for so long.
23:33 And I think we have still as retired players
23:36 to make the effort to keep trying
23:39 until we get where we want,
23:40 which is equal price money,
23:41 but also until we get to have more people
23:44 and more players making a living from tennis,
23:47 because they put so much effort.
23:48 I don't think it's fair that you have only 250 on each side
23:51 that can live from their sports.
23:52 - Ben, I'm gonna ask you to play devil's advocate,
23:54 maybe from a sports business side, perhaps.
23:57 Can you give us a reason why this hasn't happened
24:01 logistically or shouldn't happen with equal prize money?
24:06 Do you have any devil's advocate point to make on this?
24:09 - I mean, I can try to explain.
24:11 I mean, obviously I'm very for equal prize money.
24:13 And I do think it's the right time
24:14 to be having this conversation because,
24:17 first of all, it doesn't get talked about enough, period,
24:19 that the gap is still there.
24:20 I mean, tennis does a lot of congratulating itself
24:22 for equal prize money,
24:23 but that's only really at the Grand Slams
24:25 and the small handful of other tournaments,
24:26 Indio Wells, Miami, I think Madrid,
24:28 are the only other ones that have equal prize money
24:30 all year, right?
24:31 So it's been a big issue.
24:32 And also the gaps are getting much bigger,
24:34 which is an even bigger issue overall.
24:36 Like the Rome gap is increasing.
24:37 The Cincinnati gap is increasing in recent years.
24:40 And that's completely the wrong direction for it to be.
24:42 Now, the devil's advocate argument, like you were saying,
24:45 would be that the tours are separate,
24:46 they find out their prize money separately,
24:48 and that's the way it is.
24:49 But the fact is, I mean,
24:50 so much of these joint events especially
24:53 are the same.
24:54 I mean, fans will buy a ticket to Cincinnati
24:56 that will get them access to both men's and women's courts,
24:59 and they float freely between both sides of the tournament.
25:02 It's very rare for a fan, I think,
25:04 to go to a Cincinnati and only to watch just the men
25:08 or just the women.
25:08 I mean, pretty much everybody who's there
25:10 will see at least a little bit of both,
25:13 depending on their preferences.
25:14 And you can make a real effort to just watch one
25:15 if you really want to,
25:16 but that's pretty rare to not see any.
25:18 So they're stronger together.
25:20 And that's one of the things that is actually coming up
25:22 in this new deal that WTA made with this capital firm
25:25 that invested in them.
25:26 It's one of the things they're saying is that there's,
25:28 yes, there's a lot of value actually from a marketing side
25:32 by emphasizing the equality.
25:34 And actually the tennis can,
25:35 in a sort of social justice moment in the world, cynically,
25:39 that by bragging that you are this equal sport
25:42 and this pioneer,
25:43 and that's why WTA has been doing so much of retelling
25:46 the story of Billie Jean King of the original nine recently,
25:48 because those are stories they believe have,
25:50 obviously value historically,
25:51 but also value symbolically, even going forward,
25:54 to try to tap into that sort of pride that the WTA has
25:58 and their history and their tradition and heritage
26:01 of being this equal prize money,
26:02 pioneering sport for women.
26:04 And so more and more foregrounding that is there.
26:07 What people point to to be, you know,
26:09 devil's advocate is different TV deals they have
26:11 for men and women.
26:11 Usually they're sold separately.
26:13 That could be United also.
26:14 I mean, and they would increase the value for both.
26:16 It'd be more than the sum of their parts
26:18 if you package those together.
26:21 'Cause so many, I mean, in the US,
26:22 almost always they're all broadcast on the same channel.
26:25 We don't have that issue,
26:25 but sometimes if you're in a country
26:27 where the WTA is on one channel,
26:29 and ATV is another channel, yeah,
26:31 and it's a big problem for broadcasters.
26:32 If one match goes long,
26:33 and then there's blank space for a long time,
26:35 it's just a headache.
26:36 So it's much more valuable for those things
26:38 to be sold together across the board.
26:39 - Okay, another difficult conversation,
26:41 perhaps more difficult,
26:42 because this one's not as clear to us.
26:45 Your thoughts on Wimbledon's decision
26:48 to conditionally allow Russians and Belarusians
26:52 to participate in this year's tournament?
26:55 Your thoughts on the decision, again,
26:58 conditionally as in quotations in our rundown.
27:01 Simon Cambers, get us started.
27:03 - Yeah, maybe it's worth sort of just a brief explainer
27:06 of what happened and where we are now.
27:09 Last year, obviously,
27:09 Wimbledon decided to ban Russian and Belarusian players
27:14 over the invasion of Ukraine,
27:16 which was very well received by the public in Britain
27:20 at the time, who totally backed the decision.
27:24 But over the course of the year,
27:26 the rest of the tennis world didn't help Wimbledon at all
27:30 by sort of backing them up.
27:33 The other slams decided to let them in,
27:36 Russians and Belarusians,
27:38 the WTA and ATP insisting that their players are individuals
27:42 so they play not under the Russian flag
27:45 or the Belarusian flag,
27:46 but they are allowed to play.
27:48 And what forced Wimbledon's hand was,
27:51 I think, I actually think Wimbledon would,
27:54 it's hard to be sure about this,
27:56 but we've, you know,
27:57 I've had a little bit of discussions with them
28:00 as part of a small group of journalists
28:02 over the last few weeks or so.
28:04 And I get the feeling that they would have liked
28:06 to keep the ban going.
28:08 I may be wrong, but that's what I think.
28:11 It's just that the ATP and WTA find Wimbledon heavily
28:16 and the LTA, the Law and Tennis Association in Britain.
28:19 And the real thing that forced Wimbledon's hand this year
28:22 is that they threatened them with removing the sanction
28:26 of Queens and Eastbourne
28:28 and all the other British tournaments.
28:29 So you would be left in a situation,
28:31 worst case scenario where Wimbledon
28:33 is the only one that still exists,
28:34 doesn't have any ranking points,
28:36 and there are no grass court warmup events.
28:39 And the Law and Tennis Association
28:42 probably couldn't cope with that financially
28:45 as wealthy as it is because of a relationship
28:47 they have with Wimbledon.
28:48 But Wimbledon's hand was forced.
28:51 I feel like they didn't want to do this.
28:53 When we talk about conditionally,
28:55 the difference this year is that they're going to be,
28:57 the Russian and Belarusian players who play
28:58 will be asked to sign a declaration of neutrality
29:03 and none of their teams will be allowed to be,
29:06 you know, sort of representing Russia in any way.
29:08 They can't receive funding from the Russian Federation,
29:11 which I have no idea how they're going to enforce that.
29:14 That's virtually impossible.
29:17 But Wimbledon say that the difference this year
29:22 is that asking them to do this neutrality declaration
29:27 is workable now, and back then they say it wasn't.
29:30 Personally, I think I would have liked tennis
29:35 to have been more united on this initially
29:39 and to have stuck with it.
29:41 You see other sports, and I know we're going to get
29:44 into the discussion of team sports
29:45 against individual sports, but all team sports
29:48 around the world have banned Russian and Belarusian teams.
29:52 You know, what kind of message does it send
29:54 to Ukraine and to Russia when you just say,
29:57 well, you know, we're individual sports
29:59 so we don't really fit into that.
30:01 We'll just, you know, we'll let you in and you can play.
30:04 No, I know, of course, that it's not
30:08 the individual tennis players' fault
30:10 that their government invaded Ukraine.
30:13 We all know that.
30:14 But, you know, you've got to make a stand somewhere.
30:17 Wimbledon tried to make a stand
30:19 and they got punished for it.
30:20 And I feel, you know, I'm not the first person
30:24 to defend Wimbledon in a lot of things they do.
30:26 I think they make a lot of mistakes
30:28 as well as doing a lot of things right.
30:30 In this case, I think they tried to do the right thing
30:33 and maybe they felt let down by the lack of support
30:37 they got, and so here we are a year on
30:39 where it's going to be a little bit different,
30:41 but, you know, basically they can all play again
30:43 and given what's happening in tennis at the moment,
30:46 there's a pretty good chance that a Russian-born
30:49 or a Russian or a Belarusian player
30:51 goes and wins Wimbledon and it's more propaganda
30:53 for the Russian government to use.
30:55 - Marian, quickly, your thoughts on this decision
30:58 of Wimbledon to conditionally allow Russians, Belarusians
31:00 to participate in this year's tournament.
31:03 - Yeah, well, obviously as a member of Wimbledon,
31:06 I received that news probably a little bit earlier
31:09 than the press, so I was aware of it,
31:11 but as Simon very well explained,
31:13 they were put out into a situation
31:15 where they just couldn't have the whole ATA circuit
31:20 on the balance.
31:21 That was just too much to handle,
31:23 and especially that was just taking away
31:25 a lot of opportunities to, in British players,
31:28 to play in the grass court season
31:30 with the wild cards and the possibility for them
31:32 also to earn some points, and we all know
31:34 for Ema Raduken, almost everything started
31:37 in the grass court two years ago
31:38 because you gave her the opportunity with the wild card,
31:40 so those tournaments are very important
31:42 for the young British players to have those chances,
31:45 just as Rondgau is important
31:46 for a young French player as well.
31:48 So I think everything taken into consideration,
31:52 and probably as Simon very well explained,
31:54 because they were the only ones standing behind that idea,
31:58 it was just left with no other solution.
31:59 So they tried to make it as strict as possible around
32:03 and just square everything as much as they could
32:06 to make it, first of all, showing their support
32:10 to Ukraine and to Ukrainian players very strongly,
32:14 and then to really very strongly try to take on the side
32:18 the Russian Belarusian from any sort of demonstration,
32:21 anything.
32:22 So they have tried their hardest,
32:24 but unfortunately they were left with just no other options.
32:28 It was just not possible for them to continue on that path,
32:32 which is something I regret, obviously,
32:33 but the problem is the WTA and the ATP, I'm guessing,
32:38 stands for the fact that everyone has an individual chance
32:41 to compete despite everything else, religion,
32:46 whatever you want to call it, nationality.
32:48 And based on that, you can't just bridge
32:51 all those contracts,
32:51 you can't just bridge all those roles.
32:53 So I think we've been trying last year,
32:56 they saw the results.
32:58 They've been trying again this year,
33:00 but left with no other choices.
33:03 - When we can talk about so many things
33:05 that doesn't make sense when you see Novak Djokovic
33:07 denied to play in the States in in-house Miami,
33:10 and he will be able to play in July and August,
33:12 doesn't make sense.
33:13 I mean, we can raise eyebrows on so many things.
33:16 I think for this year as Wimbledon,
33:18 if you're Ian Hewitt and you have to take a decision,
33:21 you have to lean into that way,
33:23 because otherwise you just don't give enough chances
33:26 to British players and yeah,
33:29 you just don't have any other solutions.
33:31 - I think that it's tricky because I think
33:33 Wimbledon, I kind of think everyone did the right thing
33:35 last year actually, which is kind of a weird answer to have,
33:38 but I do think that Wimbledon,
33:40 because one thing Wimbledon is they're more connected
33:42 to the government than any other grand slam event is.
33:44 I mean, Wimbledon really does see itself
33:46 as part of British culture as nominally
33:48 a British government institution in a lot of ways.
33:50 I mean, they have the Royal family there,
33:51 who is technically still the heads of state,
33:54 who are very much a part of that.
33:55 And so they felt like they really had to uphold
33:57 the government view on Russia in a way that the US Open,
34:01 for example, did not feel and French Open did not feel
34:03 and Australian Open, maybe a little bit closer
34:05 to government on Australia,
34:06 but not the same as Wimbledon in terms of being
34:08 a national symbol that way.
34:09 So they felt that pressure.
34:10 And then the ATP WTA said,
34:12 that's not something we can accept because of our rules.
34:15 And so we're gonna take away the points.
34:16 I actually think that all kind of played out,
34:18 even though it was messy,
34:19 I think it all kind of made sense to me in my head.
34:22 I do think it's a problem when,
34:23 I do think Wimbledon was very naive to think
34:25 if they did this unilaterally separately,
34:26 that everyone would just kind of follow along with them.
34:28 And I think we've seen this in tennis
34:30 in recent years before where,
34:31 like the French Open, for example,
34:33 unilaterally moved in 2020 from May to September,
34:37 October for its dates.
34:38 And that caused a lot of problems and other headaches
34:40 for other federations and stuff.
34:41 So cooperation has been very low in tennis.
34:44 I do think the current situation of having the Russians
34:47 and Belarusians be neutrals is nonsense.
34:50 Everyone knows there are still Russians
34:52 and Belarusians there.
34:53 And the blank flag is very,
34:54 the blank space is very easily filled in your head
34:56 with a Russian or Belarusian flag.
34:58 And these victories are still being celebrated
35:00 in their country.
35:01 You know, Savalenka's win in Australia as a neutral
35:03 was still celebrated, I'm sure, in Belarusian media.
35:06 Like it would be if the Belarusian flag was there.
35:09 I mean, it doesn't really do anything to diminish,
35:11 I think the idea of propaganda for Wimbledon wins
35:13 that actually affects the war is kind of silly.
35:15 I don't think a Wimbledon win is going to change anything
35:17 on the battlefield meaningfully.
35:19 But what I would do is I would require all players
35:23 to have a valid country next to them.
35:25 And if you want,
35:26 if the Belarusian and Russian players want to keep playing,
35:27 they can pick a new country, basically.
35:29 And so many of them already live outside of Belarus
35:32 and Russia.
35:33 So many of them already have deep ties to there.
35:34 You know, Varvara Gacheva, I know, is switching to France
35:38 as one of the Russian players.
35:39 Dino Medvedev, for example, has lived in France and Monaco,
35:42 I guess, for a long time.
35:43 And if he was to switch to France
35:45 in time for the French Open,
35:46 I think that'd be culturally a very smooth switch.
35:49 And I'm sure France would be happy to have him.
35:50 And just, you know,
35:51 and if some Russian players don't want to do this
35:53 and think that's too much, then okay,
35:54 they can leave the tour.
35:56 I think that's sort of a way to make it so,
35:58 because just right now,
35:59 I think it's kind of this half step,
36:00 this redacting the country, but keeping the players,
36:03 I don't think actually accomplishes anything.
36:04 I think you have to do something meaningfully
36:06 to force them to separate from Russia and Belarus
36:09 more than just sort of hiding their country.
36:11 - Simon, I know there was something Ben said
36:12 that you wanted to interject on.
36:14 Please go ahead.
36:15 - Yeah, it's just,
36:16 Ben made a good point about the government.
36:17 And the government,
36:18 after Wimbledon made their announcement,
36:20 the LTA made theirs,
36:22 the government said that they think it was totally wrong
36:26 that the LTA and Wimbledon were threatened and fined,
36:29 basically, for their decision.
36:32 You know, they would have liked to have done more,
36:34 but the chances of the British government sort of,
36:37 let's say, rejecting everyone's visa
36:39 was very close to zero.
36:41 So Wimbledon would have loved that
36:43 because that would have taken it out of their hands,
36:45 but it was just never gonna happen.
36:47 - The British government made Wimbledon
36:48 do their dirty work, essentially.
36:49 And it's what, I mean,
36:50 I've mentioned Djokovic a few times in this,
36:52 but Djokovic has repeatedly been blocked by governments
36:55 from entering countries in recent years
36:57 because of his issues.
36:59 And if the British government
37:00 had been the ones to stand up and say,
37:01 "We're not going to allow
37:02 any Russians or Belarusian people in,"
37:04 then it would have protected Wimbledon.
37:05 But instead, they threw Wimbledon under the bus,
37:08 the double-decker bus, so to speak,
37:10 and let them take the hit.
37:12 - All right, folks,
37:13 final question of this episode of Match Points today.
37:17 And this comes from the Miami Open that just concluded.
37:20 Taylor Fritz explains that being consistent on the Tour,
37:24 making quarters and semis,
37:26 was less rewarding in terms of rankings and points
37:30 than winning tournaments.
37:31 The question we're being asked is,
37:33 are you happy with the current point system
37:36 on the ATP Tour, yes or no?
37:40 Marin Bartoli.
37:41 - Well, it always worked this way.
37:43 And when it was not working that way,
37:45 it was causing a lot of issues
37:47 because when Serena, for example,
37:48 was not playing that many events,
37:49 but was winning three Grand Slams a year,
37:52 if a girl was playing a lot more
37:54 and winning what was not called back then Masters 1000,
37:57 but it would be the equivalency now, WTA 1000,
38:01 she was ahead of number one
38:02 when everyone would think Serena was number one
38:04 because she was winning the majority of the Grand Slams.
38:06 So you have to make it that way
38:08 because for the public,
38:09 it has to be clear that when you win
38:11 the majority of the slams,
38:12 you're the number one player in the world.
38:14 Because we, us as tennis fanatics,
38:17 we obviously follow everything year long
38:19 and the ranking and the points and everything,
38:21 but you have to also think
38:22 from not so regular fan point of view
38:26 that you have to make things quite easy to follow
38:29 because if Djokovic is winning two or three slams a year
38:32 and he's not number one in the world,
38:33 you're gonna be like,
38:34 so who is playing better since he won three Grand Slams?
38:37 So you have to make it clear for the fans.
38:39 And obviously it always been the case,
38:42 again, when the new ranking system was in place
38:45 that you almost double the points as you move into rounds.
38:49 So when I was playing, for example,
38:51 Grand Slam title was 2000 points,
38:53 semi-final was 900
38:56 and final was I think 1300 or 1400.
39:00 So if you win, you obviously take that gap.
39:03 And even if you don't play the rest of,
39:06 the majority of the events,
39:07 because you get that gap,
39:08 then you still take that ranking up.
39:10 And I think it's fair to work it this way
39:12 because you have to think as a fan point of view,
39:14 once again, we have been talking about
39:16 the prize money and everything.
39:18 The prize money will come even more
39:21 when the fan base is so strong
39:23 because fans understand what's happening.
39:26 And I think as part of the understanding,
39:28 it's a lot more readable to think of
39:32 when someone wins multiple tournaments
39:35 and the ones who have given the most points,
39:37 they're with the highest ranking.
39:39 I think it should remain that way.
39:40 - Fair enough.
39:41 And to answer Ben Rothenberg,
39:42 happy with the current point system for the ATP Tour
39:45 and Taylor Fritz's thoughts.
39:47 - Yeah, I think the system,
39:49 just sort of how we're raised in tennis, it makes sense.
39:51 You just get so much more attention for winning
39:53 than you do for some sort of commensurate
39:55 quarterfinal or semi-final.
39:56 I mean, Marion can speak to this, I'm sure,
39:57 like the attention and praise and memory
40:00 she has from winning Wimbledon
40:01 are more than double probably
40:03 what you had from losing in the final
40:05 the time she was a runner up.
40:06 I mean, like it's just,
40:08 we focus on the winners
40:09 and the winners get the glory and attention
40:10 and ranking points and everything.
40:11 And it could even be maybe more extreme than that sometimes.
40:13 I mean, because I think getting a champion at Wimbledon,
40:16 for example, is more than eight times as valuable
40:18 as being a quarterfinalist or whatever.
40:20 Like it's just the emphasis on these late rounds
40:22 on holding up the trophy at the end
40:24 is what tennis is all about.
40:25 It's winner take all.
40:26 And it's harsh.
40:27 Sometimes you can feel like you're doing a great job
40:29 if you're ranked between seven and 12
40:31 and making a lot of quarterfinals and doing stuff.
40:33 But ultimately you're probably not the one
40:35 selling the tickets and being on the poster
40:37 and moving the product.
40:38 It's a very, very top heavy sport for better and for worse.
40:41 And it really is about superstars
40:43 rather than about sort of the group of people.
40:45 - Yeah, I mean, it's funny to think, isn't it?
40:47 Before the rankings were introduced in '73,
40:50 it used to be a bunch of journalists who picked the number one.
40:52 Now imagine that now.
40:53 You'd be a laugh, wouldn't it?
40:54 That would go down well.
40:56 - Let's do it again.
40:56 Let's do it again.
40:57 (laughing)
40:58 - But I think,
41:00 I like, I don't mind the ranking system as it is.
41:04 I think, as both Marin and Ben said,
41:07 it's about, it is about winning.
41:08 You need to reward that
41:10 because everyone loses almost every week.
41:13 When you win, it needs to be something big.
41:14 It needs to mean something.
41:16 What I would like to see reintroduced is bonus points
41:20 for beating top-ranked players.
41:23 Because the speed that people can move
41:26 from lower rankings up to the higher up
41:29 is pretty slow unless you're a superstar
41:32 and you just make a massive breakthrough.
41:33 But if you're, I was just thinking
41:35 while you were talking about Tim Van Riethoven
41:37 when he won on grass before Wimbledon
41:41 in Den Bosch last year.
41:43 You know, he deserved maybe more points
41:45 than he got for that.
41:46 And he deserved a few extra points to push him up.
41:49 - He used to be actually the Grand Slam even win
41:51 over top player, you get even double bonus point.
41:54 So it was regular point each point
41:56 for the rest of the year and then Grand Slam
41:57 when he was even counting more.
41:59 - And we will leave it there for today.
42:00 Thank you so much.
42:02 Marin Bartoli, Simon Camber, Ben Rothenberg.
42:04 Folks, remember, there is an audio only version.
42:06 There's plenty of video as well as podcasts to enjoy
42:09 here on TennisMajors.com for the entire team.
42:12 Josh Cohen saying thanks for watching.
42:13 We will catch you next time for more to match points
42:16 right here on TennisMajors.com.
42:18 (upbeat music)
42:20 (upbeat music)
42:23 (upbeat music)