He Became One-Man Gang on His Way to French Title

I for one am not a bit surprised that Andre Agassi won the French Open this year, because judging by the television coverage, he was the only player on the court. Oh, I know that Andrei Medvedev was there because I saw him accept the runner-up trophy, but before that it was kind of dicey.

It didn’t matter what the score was--the camera was on Agassi. Andre wins the point--close-up on Andre. Andre loses the point--close-up on Andre. (To be fair, it was broken up frequently with close-ups on Brad Gilbert, Agassi’s coach.)

I’ve heard all the arguments about men’s tennis not being colorful enough, about there not being enough charismatic players out there. I also concede that Agassi is a marketing miracle, a guy who could sell anything from rackets to Rogaine if he chose to.

Winning all four Grand Slam titles is certainly an outstanding achievement, but the coverage was totally overblown all around. I’m happy for Agassi that this time he actually won the tournament so he could live up to the hype for a change. I’m happy for all the advertisers who got their money’s worth. But most of all I’m happy that I have two Andre-free weeks until Wimbledon.

JULIE JACOBSON, South Pasadena

*

For Agassi, it was a Brooke-through Grand Slam achievement.

JOHN ROTUNNI, Glendora

*

It was ironic that Eddie Stanky passed away on the same day that Andre Agassi became only the fifth man to win all four Grand Slam events. Ironic because more than five years ago, Jim Murray wrote that Andre Agassi reminded him of Eddie Stanky, of whom Leo Durocher once said, “He can’t run, he can’t hit, he can’t throw. All he does is beat you.”

When Agassi reached the quarterfinals, I reflected on that article and felt certain then he was going to win. Murray had a way of writing things before they happened. Last Sunday was a great day for the sport of tennis. Andre Agassi’s triumph in the French was more than spectacular. It was written.

DOUGLAS LITTLETON, Dana Point