Commentary : Tennis Is Struggling to Discover Its Place

The U.S. Open is history, but the place of tennis in American sporting life remains uncertain. I suspect that for every one of us who is enthralled by the championships, there are two sports fans who still consider tennis outside the sporting pale.

Unfortunately, the coverage of the sport’s biggest events and the behavior of some of its top players contribute to the ambivalent feelings that accompany the game in the middle ‘80s. The media seem too dazzled by the high-society aspects to accept tennis as an ordinary sport; as for the players, their finicky demands and prima donna antics often blind the public to their remarkable stamina, reflexes and anticipation.

Let’s be clear about one point: Tennis players at the top level are remarkably conditioned athletes. To stay on court for hours in a variety of conditions requires the type of dedication to sport and fitness that would shame athletes in sports often regarded as considerably more demanding. Anybody who thinks that tennis is for the faint-hearted simply doesn’t understand the game played today by many of the world’s finest athletes.

That said, why does the media insist on treating tennis players differently? When was the last time you saw a shot of some baseball player’s mother as our hero was at bat? When did the camera concentrate on the quarterback’s wife as the offensive field general played his Super Bowl? In most sports, athletes say, “Hi, Mom” when the camera hoves into view; in tennis, the camera finds Mom, Dad, brothers, sisters and occasional friends in the name of “drama” at courtside.

At the same time, tennis players are under more media scrutiny for their private lives than any other athletes. Had the sportswriters of America been as aggressive with regard to baseball players’ drug use or college athletics’ abuses as they have been about female tennis players’ sexual preferences we might not now be looking at the current morass in baseball and college sport.

And when do you think that microphones will be allowed in NFL huddles or baseball’s dugouts? They’re already right there in tennis, a point that John McEnroe raised more than once at the U.S. Open. McEnroe may be a bit too sensitive, but his charge that courtside mikes were too close for comfort cannot be brushed aside. If football and baseball players are allowed the privacy of their objections, why not tennis players? Is it because we are too fascinated by gentlemanly--or in Mighty Mac’s case--ungentlemanly dissent?

I suspect it is because we don’t quite know what to do with the sport. Major columnists, after all, notice it only at the “big” events. Most often, the fan follows tennis by reading the small print on the scoreboard pages of newspapers.

Why? For one thing, it is the only game where women and men are truly equal in terms of entertainment value, where it is necessary for everybody to recognize that the golden skills of Martina Navratilova and Chris Evert Lloyd are every bit as well-honed as those of McEnroe and Jimmy Connors. Given the fact society has had difficulty accepting female emancipation, it is not surprising that women tennis players have for so long had to listen to innuendoes and to defend their right to a place in sport’s forefront.

At the same time, the presence of superb women players probably works against the male stars of the game. They are the only men in the sports world who must compete with women for attention, so it has long been fashionable to consider tennis as less than a macho game. Now that we are all seeing just how demanding the sport is--mentally and physically--tennis is gaining grudging acceptance.

Still, it never will be football, will it?

So, is it merely being picky to point out Brent Musburger’s under-the-pressure-of-time sign-off of Friday afternoon when he announced that Saturday’s telecast would include two men’s semifinals and the “women’s championship,” while Sunday’s telecast would feature “the championship”? No, Brent didn’t say “men’s,” but “the.”

One can be over-sensitive to such linguistic slights, but after the wonderful drama of Hana Mandlikova’s victory over Chris Evert Lloyd it seemed the moment to emphasize that there are two equal titles on offer at Flushing Meadow, not a women’s final, followed by “the championship.” Women such as Billie Jean King fought that conception years ago to gain recognition for their sport.

All this is part of the initial question, the place of tennis among American sports. While the game is marvelously treated by television--overall, one can have few complaints with the work of USA and CBS at the U.S. Open or with USA, HBO and NBC at the French Open and Wimbledon--we still have difficulty getting to grips with it. True, the code of ethics is different from American games and seems dated now when the players are no longer landed aristocrats with an idle afternoon to pass. But too often, the media remain enraptured by the tradition of the game, oblivious to what is actually happening today.

The increasing predominance of teen-age players has raised the issue of exploitation of athletic talent, but we have done precious little in the media to point out the perils of loneliness and the physical and emotional strain that accompany a youngster in this high-pressure world. It is easier to make an idol of Boris Becker than to detail the pitfalls that await any 17-year-old thrust into prominence for his unusual ability to strike a tennis ball. Such precocity is no guarantee of the emotional or intellectual stability necessary to withstand the glare of incessant publicity.

Unquestionably, the advent of televised tennis has introduced many of us to the joys of a sport once relegated to the fringe. We are often transfixed by the sheer beauty of the encounter, the athleticism of the players and the exposure of their emotions under pressure.

We simultaneously admire and fear people who can respond to such challenges.