By Bill Simons
Cave men didn’t know.
We don’t know either.
Despite all our wisdom, all our computers, all our knock-your-socks-off “futurologists,” with their endless stats and seamless trend analyses, we still can’t predict much of anything about the future. Will the stock market fly or flop? Who’ll win the Derby? Will the • 9ers strike gold with their hot new No. 1 draft pick? Who knows?
Thus, the intrigue of speculation, the allure of the prediction. No question about it, from the Book of Revelation to Nostradamus, to the rise of ESPN.com, the art of the prediction — solemn or silly, brash or brazen — has captured our imagination.
In the 1926 World Series, Babe Ruth gestured toward the Wrigley Field fence, then backed up his bold taunt with a devastating blast. The Cubs haven’t been the same since. Part of the mystique of Muhammad Ali were those uncanny (“Liston ain’t that great; he’ll fall in eight”) ditties that foresaw the round in which he would level his opponent. And Broadway Joe Namath’s unwavering guarantee that his wannabe New York Jets from the rag-tag AFL would bring the NFL’s mighty Baltimore Colts to their knees forever re-shaped pro football.
Vegas long ago installed the Patriots as a 6-1 favorite to again win the Super Bowl and Sports Illustrated has already assured us that Duke will win next year’s NCAA hoops crown. These days, even sacred endeavors can draw a flood of profane wagers. After all, before the ascension of odds-on favorite Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, there was more wagering on the papal election than on any other non-sports event in history.
As for tennis, our sport’s most celebrated wager came when brash Bobby Riggs successfully bet on himself to win the ‘39 Wimbledon singles, doubles and mixed doubles titles — and subsequently collected $100,000. But tennis’ most stunning prediction came from Richard Williams, who brazenly claimed that his two, still very young, very gawky and unproven kids — Venus and Serena — would become No. 1 and No. 2 in the world.
Of course, not all predictions are so prescient. A short-list:
• The German Federation saw no future in a gangly 12-year-old kid in their program, so they withdrew their support of young Boris Becker.
• After Borg won the ‘72 Wimbledon Junior title, BBC sage John Barrett dismissed him, saying, “Clearly, here’s a player of great match-play potential. But from the way he hits the ball, he’ll be of no account on grass.” Bjorn went on to collect five Wimbys.
• After Pat McEnroe claimed Amelie Mauresmo would win the ‘01 French title, his brother John leaned over to him in the broadcast booth and sighed, “I’ve got something to tell you, out on an outer court Amelie just lost her first-round match.”
 |
 |
 |
| Unlike many Andre watchers, the Babe and Broadway Joe foresaw the future. |
|
• After losing to Sampras at the ‘02 U.S. Open, Greg Rusedski asserted that Pete had slowed, his returns were weak and that he “wasn’t playing that great. I would be surprised if he wins his next match.” Well, lo and behold, Pete actually won his next three matches — over Tommy Haas, Roddick and Agassi — to claim one of his most celebrated titles.
• Over the years, tennis has endured plenty of doom-and-gloom naysayers. Stuffed shirts all but insisted Western civilization would implode if amateur tennis was abandoned. Macho Aussies in the ‘60s and early ‘70s infamously claimed that fans “wouldn’t pay one dime to watch women’s tennis.” And in ‘85, Arthur Ashe said, “I don’t see anybody of McEnroe’s or Connors’ class in the U.S. In about three years, the bottom is going to fall out of American men’s professional tennis.” Well, within three years, America’s Fab Four — Sampras, Agassi, Courier and Chang — were already beginning to captivate us.
These days, the grass of Wimbledon, with its specific demands, yields the most reliable predictions. In the past 12 years, Sampras and just five others have won. In contrast, the French Open — once so true to form (pick Evert, and Borg or Lendl, and you’re sitting pretty) — now has become the most unpredictable major. After all, no one in this universe foresaw Gaston Gaudio and Anastasia Myskina winning the ‘04 titles. In fact, in ‘97, the Roland Garros field was so wide open that when Thomas Muster was asked who would win, he simply responded, “Spain.” This zany quip was just one in a long line of offbeat tennis prognostications. Anna Kournikova claimed there would be topless tennis in our future. Ted Tinling said Jennifer Capriati would have a fabulous career “if she doesn’t fall in love with a ballboy.” In ‘99, coach Rick Macci asserted his 14 -year-old pupil Monique Viele was “going to be the first player to sing the national anthem before a match and then go on and win the tournament.” (It never happened.) Plus, this publication has made a string of playful predictions. &
We suggested that in a few decades:
• Monday Night Tennis would thrive.
• A curious form of the game — “Extreme Tennis” — would flourish. In this variation, only the first serve IN would count. Noise, movement during play and rants over line calls would be encouraged, while white clothes, shirts, daytime matches and grass courts would all be strictly prohibited.
• The U.S. Open, with its $500 million purse, would be played in the 87,612-seat, all-suite Intel Stadium.
• World TeamTennis would expand so much that two of their teams will be the Martian Red Storm and the Venetian Vibes.
Not that surprisingly, in the history of this game, one man and his family have attracted far more curiosity and encountered more ill-conceived predictions than any other.
• Andre Agassi’s brother-in-law, Pancho Gonzalez, confided, “When I first saw Andre at two or three, I didn’t think he was going to be very good.”
• In ‘82, after Tracy Austin beat 13-year-old Steffi Graf in her first pro match, Austin said, “There are hundreds of players like her [back] in America.”
• At the ‘88 U.S. Open, the young, cocky Agassi casually predicted he would whip Jimmy Connors “three, three and three,” The pronouncement set off an infamous Jimbo hissy fit. “That’s a bad mistake,” he seethed. “I’ll remember that. It’s a war zone out there. I enjoy playing guys who could be my children. Maybe he’s one of them. Hell, I’ve spent a lot of time in Vegas.”
By the way, just as he said he would, Agassi dropped only nine games en route to a straight-sets victory. But, oh dear, the 6-2, 7-6, 6-1 score was far different from what he foresaw.
• In ‘92, the Miami Herald’s Edwin Pope wrote, “If Andre doesn’t pull himself together soon, he could be all the way out of tennis in two or three years.”
• In ’99, British Davis Cup Captain David Lloyd said, “Agassi couldn’t beat my mum now. He’s finished.”
• Just four days after Sports Illustrated bemoaned the problems of the game and asked “Is tennis trying to commit suicide?” Agassi and Graf prevailed at the ‘99 French Open in perhaps the two most stunning back-to-back days in tennis history.
• Long before Andre and Steffi had their two kids, IT predicted that their son (we called him Angel) would use his great speed and laser return of serve to be No. 1 for three years.
And finally, let me go out on a limb and make three of my own predictions.
1. Rafael Nadal will win the men’s French title.
2. Justine Henin-Hardenne will win the women’s.
3. Both of these predictions will be wrong.
© 2005
INSIDE TENNIS All rights reserved.
All photographs, text and graphics, appearing on the Inside Tennis web site are protected by copyright.
Any republication, retransmission or reproduction or other use is prohibited without express written permission of Inside Tennis.
 |
