The strange, slow death of American men’s tennis
It is now 15 years since a US man won a grand slam event – Andy Roddick at Flushing Meadows in 2003. Charlie Eccleshare examines the reasons for the decline and the nation’s plans to end it
Impact of globalisation
When US President Ronald Reagan exhorted Mikhail Gorbachev to “tear down this wall” in 1987, it is unlikely that he predicted his demand would lead to a decline in American men’s tennis. Yet the beginnings of the US slump can be traced back to the geopolitical events of 1989, when the Berlin Wall was reduced to rubble.
The forces of globalisation that were unleashed in the aftermath of those heady days had the effect of exposing former Eastern Bloc countries to mainstream sports and turning tennis into a truly world game. Previously America had only really had to compete with Australia, South America and western Europe; now eastern Europe and the former USSR were in play, leading to the emergence of a clutch of slam-winning players, most notably
Novak Djokovic. More tournaments also moved to Europe.
Martin Blackman – an American professional in the mid-1980s to mid-1990s and now the head of player development at the
US Tennis Association – observed a “Europeanisation” of the sport. “Tennis was also reinstated as an Olympic sport in 1988”, he explains. “This led to other nations’ federations playing a more substantial role in subsidising player development.”
Complacency in coaching
America was not worried though, and why would it have been? The country was in the middle of an unprecedented men’s tennis boom, claiming six of the top 10 spots in the ATP rankings at the start of 1990. But as complacency set in, the rest of the world – and especially European countries – caught up.
By the time former world No28 Patrick Mcenroe was brought in as the USTA’S head of player development in 2008, American men’s tennis was struggling. “There was some complacency,” he says. “We had so many great players in the past but it happened by chance. We had great facilities and coaches but we became pretty spoiled by Jimmy Connors, my brother [John Mcenroe], Andre Agassi and Pete Sampras. “Our goal at the USTA was to have more of a coaching philosophy. The problem was we were behind Europe where they were doing a lot of these things already.
“The rest of the world caught up, and training got better with more sophisticated movement and ball drills. The movement, flexibility and athleticism of other nations improved.”
Mcenroe also had to contend with more players eschewing America’s very successful college system that had spawned the likes of Arthur Ashe and Connors, and instead turning pro straight out of high school.
With tennis becoming more and more physical, this proved to be an unsuccessful route for a lost generation of players like former junior world No1 Donald Young, who is now ranked outside the world’s top 200. Responding to Mcenroe’s pleas, the USTA belatedly started to invest substantially in player development to match what European federations were doing.
The benefits of that can be seen now with the emergence of young Americans like Frances Tiafoe and Taylor Fritz, but the damage in the short term had been done.
Attraction of other sports
Compounding America’s struggle is the increasingly difficult task of convincing its best athletes to play tennis.
The cost of the sport – with the USTA until recently not doing enough to subsidise it – has put youngsters off, with issues around diversity and elitism also proving barriers.
As Blackman says: “The perception of tennis as an elite sport is not as prevalent as it was before but there was a time not so long ago when it was definitely there.”
The range of other sports available to young American athletes – baseball, basketball and American football among them – exacerbates the issue. As Tom Gullikson, who coached with the
‘The US had great players but it was by chance. Now the rest of the world has caught up’
USTA for 29 years, captained the American Davis Cup team and briefly worked with Sampras, pointed out: “When you look around the world, tennis is probably in the top few sports but in the US it’s not even in the top 10.”
A vicious cycle has also emerged where the longer America goes without a male tennis champion, the less likely it is young boys will pick up the sport. Very few would rather be the next Sam Querrey than the next Stephen Curry.
The women’s game provides a stark contrast, since the continued success of the Williams sisters has provided the likes of Sloane Stephens and Madison Keys with two inspiring role models.
Lack of professionalism
A less tangible factor in the decline has been a suspicion that some American players have lacked the hunger of their forebears. Jim Courier, the four-time major winner and current US Davis Cup captain, has been an outspoken critic of some of his compatriots’ application, and believes that until Americans match the work ethic of their European rivals they will continue to lag behind their major rivals.
“Being successful requires a hunger and a desire, and some of our best, most talented players currently playing don’t have that,” he told The Daily Telegraph. “We still have room to improve in our professionalism. We’re still not at the level of the top players by and large. America as a whole is not as sound as the players coming from say Spain, in terms of owning their games, owning their tactics, being prepared and 100 per cent fit all the time. We haven’t had that consistency and well-roundedness and a big goal of the USTA is to develop that.”
Gullikson, who stresses that his current charge Mackenzie Mcdonald, a young Californian ranked No 79, is anything but work-shy, laments the indolence of some of his fellow Americans. “When I was at the USTA there were players who weren’t fit enough and lacked that daily commitment,” he said. “A lot of the guys aren’t fit enough. We need to be in better shape.”
One-dimensional players
One of the accusations levelled against American tennis players of the last 15 years is that they are one-dimensional, with games built around big serves and forehands, and not a whole lot else – think John Isner and Querrey.
This is partly a consequence of a lack of access to clay courts, a slower surface on which youngsters are forced to develop court craft and variety. In America as a whole, green clay courts – which play faster than the red clay used in Europe and South America – make up around 15-20 per cent of the country’s courts, which is a higher proportion than rival grand slam nations like France and the UK.
The issue is that red clay courts are extremely rare in America, while the green clay courts are highly concentrated in certain areas like Florida but sparse elsewhere. Growing up in California for instance, the world No 34 and former US No 1 Steve Johnson says: “I didn’t play on clay until my late teens so I’ve learnt on the fly as a professional.”
Brad Gilbert, who counts coaching both Roddick and Agassi to grand slam titles among his many successes, is evangelical about the need for more clay courts in the US.
“Clay is absolutely critical because it teaches you discipline and how to build a point,” he says. “If I was in charge of the USTA we would be playing 75 per cent of tournaments on clay. It helps you learn and takes great discipline, which are great things to learn as a kid. You can’t just slap winners.”
Under Blackman, the USTA has recognised the importance of the surface and at the National Campus in Orlando, which opened last year, there are six red clay courts. Blackman insists the USTA is committed to building more red clay courts across the country to help develop more rounded players.
More faith in youth
Despite the relative lack of recent success, the outlook for men’s tennis is positive. America has comfortably more players in the world’s top 100 than any other nation – five of whom are 25 or younger – and in Tiafoe, the world No 42 despite still being only 20, possesses a player who looks every inch a future major champion.
For Blackman, the most crucial aim has been changing the mindset of the USTA. Gone are the days when the organisation’s energy went into developing just a handful of cherry-picked individuals. Now America’s focus is on making tennis more inclusive and accessible, helped by five Regional Tennis Centre programmes spread across the country.
Blackman has also put more of an emphasis on coaching programmes tailored to each individual and on educating young players about the realities of becoming a successful pro.
The next few years will show us if US men’s tennis has turned a corner, but as Courier says: “American tennis fans are certainly ready for a male grand-slam champion.”