My dad works in B2B marketing. He came by my school for career day and said he was a big row as man. Then he told everyone how much he loved calculating his return on ad spend. My friends still laughing me to this day. Not everyone gets B2B, but with LinkedIn, you'll be able to reach people who do. Get a hundred dollar credit on your next ad campaign. Go to LinkedIn.com slash results to claim your credit. That's LinkedIn.com slash results. Terms and conditions apply. LinkedIn, the place to be, to be.
We all have dreams, dream home renovations, dream vacations, or sending our kids to their dream colleges. But finding straightforward ways to turn those dreams into realistic goals, that's where things get tricky. Meryl understands that. That's why, with a dedicated Meryl advisor, you get a personalized plan and a clear path forward. And having the bullet your back helps your whole financial life move with you. So when your plans change, Meryl is with you every day.
So, go to ML.com slash bullish to learn more. Meryl, a bank of America company. What would you like the power to do? Investing involves risk. Meryl Lynch, Pierce Fenerance Myth Incorporated, registered broker dealer, registered investment advisor, member SIPC. Hi, this is Billie Jean King. This is Mary Ann Bautotti. This is Bianca and Drasco. I'm Matt Belander. This is Mary Carillo. This is Pam Shriver. This is Yannick Noah and you're listening to the tennis podcast.
Hello and welcome to the tennis podcast live from New York. Yes, you find us in tennis podcast towers New York. It might look a little familiar to you because it is the same as tennis podcast towers New York from last year. I'm Catherine Whittaker. This is Matt Roberts. This is David Law. We're all in the same place. And that place is the same.
And that place is New York City. Matt and I arrived late last night. David has been swanning around Manhattan for a week now. And more. Yes, I have no jet lag at all. How you feeling? Well, I have jet lag. We were sort of fine until until you know the world number one big became embroiled in a doping scandal of sorts.
You know those days where you wake up in a bit of a days because you jet lagged and then you realize that you've brought your Australian travel adapters to America rather than your US ones. So you leave for target. You know those days and then they get even more complicated by the fact that when you're walking home, you get an notification that the world number ones.
And you're just a bit more positive. So yeah, that's how I'm doing. Yeah, yeah, that's that's how we're all doing in various different ways. Obviously that's going to be a big topic of conversation for today's podcast. We're going to talk about tennis as well and various other things. But Yannick's in it of course is the lead story today. And this is for most of the duration of the show, but just for a quick moment David, you were a fan yesterday. Yes. You went to US Open Fan Week.
I did. I did. And I had the most amazing day. I went with my two kids and my wife and I queued up for every opportunity that they have. All their sponsors start putting on little games. I walked away with about five prizes. All of which I really like. What did you mean prizes fall? I managed to you know like in tipping point and stuff like that where you put a coin in and it has to fall in a certain bit.
And I got it in the right bit. And as a result of that, I walked home with a phone charger. And my daughter got this lovely glass. So that was nice. They got their faces painted. I was going to say we've seen pictures of both of your children with their faces painted, but not you. Well, I lined up, but they're just they weren't we weren't having it. I mean, that's the only downside of the whole day.
Were you wearing an explicit t-shirt? That wasn't. Now I was just wearing a standard tennis podcast t-shirt rather than the shit the microphones one that I turned up to kids day. And I was wearing an open and stood next to a sheep. I say to him, but I had like a toy sheep character. But we also sat on the fourth row of Arthur Astadium watching Daniel Mevadev practicing, which was incredible.
And you know, this was all free. And I mean, it is not cheap to go to the US Open and the places are sell out. And yet it is expensive. But this whole week, you just walk in and it's free. And they've got all this stuff laid down. We were watching qualifying matches. We were sitting there in the front few rows of the Arthur Astadium watching kind of practice matches.
It's a really cool initiative. And we had a great day. It runs through until Sunday, the 25th of August. So this coming Sunday as David said, grounds of mission is free. But there are also a bunch of featured events with tickets for those starting at $30, including tonight. When there is the doubles event, US Open mixed madness presented by IHG hotels and resorts. That's got stars like Coco Gough and Ben Shelton teaming up playing together in a mixed doubles competition.
So that's tonight as we come to you on Tuesday, the 20th of August. There's also top players like know about Djokovic, Caroline Mozniakki playing in stars of the open presented by Chase. That's to benefit the USTA foundation. There's US Open qualifying that's going on. And as David says, you can watch the big stars in practice as well. And on Thursday, really clashing with our off-broadway debut. How dare they?
There's the US Open's premier food event, flavors of the open presented by Dobel Tequila. So it's a really, really cool thing. And it's on until Sunday if you want to check it out. Just visit us open.org forward slash fan week. Now, on to matters rather more. Seriously, seriously, certainly one word for it, Matt. Yes, for anybody that's been living in a cupboard for the last couple of hours. It became clear today that World No. 1.
So series got things to say about this folks. It became clear earlier on today that the World No. 1 Yannick sinner has been cleared of any wrongdoing after twice testing positive for a band substance in March of this year.
Now, obviously the fact here are really important. So bear with me as I run through it all. And we've read a number of different write ups of this today in various different publications. But the majority of this is informed by a piece from the BBC Sport website written by the correspondent Russell Fuller. So synitester positive for what the ITIA describe as low levels of a metabolite called claustabol. It's a steroid that can be used to build muscle mass.
That positive test was registered during Indian Wells of this year. The ITIA described the levels as I said as low. Yannick sinners lawyers said it amounted to quote less than a billionth of a gram. Now they don't specify. It's all about ratios. Isn't it quantity per milliliter of blood or whatever. There's no sort of specificity in terms of what Yannick sinner is saying in his statement. But that's how they've worded it.
And further sample taken eight days later also tested positive for low levels of the same band substance the international tennis integrity unit agency rather the ITIA found that sinner was inadvertently contaminated with the substance by Jack Colmo Naldi his physiotherapist.
The report states that now the cut his finger a finger on his left hand on a scalpel in his treatment bag on the third of March. And now now he had been applying an over the counter spray to that cut one that was available in Italy which incidentally one is one of the only countries where claustabol is still readily available without a prescription.
And note here more than half of the world claustabol doping cases do have come out of Italy in recent years so he was replying that to the cut and it then carried out treatments massage treatments on Yannick sinner without wearing gloves. Yannick sinner also stated that he suffers from a skin condition on his feet and back and that leads to scratching and can cause small cuts and lesions in the affected areas.
So a provisional suspension was applied automatically on the occasion of both failed tests those provisional suspensions were in play from the fourth to the fifth of April. Now the Miami final which Yannick sinner one was on March the 31st so four days before that first ban and the second provisional suspension was from the 17th to the 20th of April.
And Yannick sinner played his first match in Madrid on April the 27th beating Lorenzo Sonigo under the world anti doping code a provisional suspension is automatically applied when a player test positive for a non specified substance players have the right to apply to an independent tribunal chair to have that suspension lifted.
Now that is what Yannick sinner did in both those cases he urgently appealed successfully against the suspension and was able to provide an explanation of how the substance has entered his system that the explanation that I detail just a moment ago.
The ITIA accepted that explanation and that the violation was not intentional that ruling can be appealed by what are the world anti doping agency we haven't heard anything to suggest that they will be doing that but just to note there that it can be appealed he will however lose his 400 ranking points and $325,000 in prize money for his run in India miles because that is where he tested positive.
So news of this dropped at 10 a.m. this morning and was clearly a coordinated thing lots of journalists had the news bang on 10 a.m. at 10 o. 6 a.m. Yannick sinner released the following statement the headline of which is Yannick sinner cleared of any wrongdoing by independent tribunal in April Yannick sinner was notified that he had tested positive for a trace element of a metabolite of the substance claustable as I say they specified less than a billionth of a ground.
Following a thorough and extensive investigation the ITIA and Yannick discovered the inadvertent contamination of claustable came through the treatment he received from the physiotherapist. His physiotherapist did not know that he was using the product containing claustable. The physiotherapist treated Yannick without gloves and coupled with various skinneeds on Yannick's body caused the inadvertent contamination. Yannick has cooperated fully with the ITIA's investigation from the beginning.
The ITIA is battling misconduct in sport and doping in particular its rules and processes are exceptionally rigorous and following forensic investigation and an independent hearing the independent tribunal have decided that Yannick is innocent. He is not at fault. However, given the strict liability nature of the anti-doping rules he accepts that he loses the point from the Indian Wells Tournament where the test took place.
Sinner acknowledges the importance of the ITIA's strict anti-doping rules for the protection of the sport he loves. I will now put this challenging and deeply unfortunate period behind me. Sinner says, I will continue to do everything I can to ensure I continue to comply with the ITIA's anti-doping program. I have a team around me that are meticulous in their own compliance. The matter is now closed and Yannick Sinner is looking forward to his upcoming rest of the season.
Just bear with me a couple more minutes here folks. We are getting through it. The ATP statement says that we are encouraged that no fault or negligence has been found on Yannick Sinner's part. We would also like to acknowledge the robustness of the investigation process and independent evaluation of the facts under the tennis anti-doping program TADP. It is a lot of acronyms today which has allowed him to continue competing.
This has been a challenging matter for Yannick in his team and under schools the need for players and their own to arge to take utmost care in the use of products or treatments. The integrity is paramount in our sport now. I am sure most of you listening watching are aware that there has been a pretty loud reaction to this on Twitter and various other social media. Dennis Schappel-Valov straight in there, two posts from him on Twitter.
He says, I can't imagine what every other player that got banned for contaminated substances is feeling right now. Luke Apewe replied to that saying, what about players that got banned for three no-shows and have never tested positive. Dennis Schappel-Valov replied to that, different rules for different players.
The British player who was suspended for doping violations in June 2022 before having her suspension lifted in December 2023 when an independent tribunal panel ruled that the source of the performance enhancing drugs found in her test samples were contaminated by meat she'd eaten. She posted the following on X. I guess only the top players images matter.
I guess only the independent tribunal's opinion on the top players is taken as sound and right. Yet they question them in my case, just makes no sense. The embroidery said on Twitter, whether sinter was doping or not, this is not right. Plenty of players go through the same thing and have to wait months or years for their innocence to be declared not a good look. Nick Kirios is in with an opinion. He said, ridiculous, whether it was accidental or planned, you should get tested twice.
You get, sorry, you get tested twice with a banned steroid substance. You should be gone for two years. Your performance was enhanced. Massage cream, yeah nice, I roll emoji. The PTPA director, director Ahmad Nasser said the following on Twitter players winning anti-doping violation appeals is generally good, but we have to have a clear consistent process for all players.
No matter what region of the world they make all home, the absence of a clear and consistent system creates obvious problems for players who are not the perceived ranking gender and or nationality of choice. The absence also undermines the tennis establishment's credibility with fans and the media. Clarity and consistency or hallmarks of what PTPA players is, of what the PTPA is pushing the tennis establishment to adopt across the board for the benefit of all.
And just finally, John Werfeim I think has summed up here on Twitter, kind of the what's it issue here, he says. The headline is that Senate was exonerated, but so many process questions here. And so many other athletes who would have loved for the details of a positive test to have been suppressed until there was a finding of non-gilt or negligence. Lots to take in. Well done. Your reaction, I guess, is the first place to start David?
Well, initially stunned because this would appear to be something that Yannick's Senate has had in his life for several months now having been informed of the positive test and then going through the process to appeal and prevent this from going public.
And yet has still played and as we saw even over the last few days, one, which at no point did I ever think of something's up with Yannick's Senate that's that's on toward here, or that he's having a series of issues to deal with along these lines. We knew about him having a hip problem. That's all we've known about in his world over the last six months and actually that does seem to have taken place at a similar time to this.
No suggestion that that's related in any way, but they do correlate at least in terms of timings. And it comes off on the back of so many cases, Tara Moore, you gave us an example, think of Samoan Halop who served a long time out of the game, which was then reduced on appeal to a point where she was actually out of the game longer than the suspension that ended up standing.
And I realized there are details in each of these cases that will be different and he's gone through the process and managed to keep this quiet and actually avoid any sort of suspension. But I can understand therefore why the other players are just looking at the facts of this and thinking well, how come he's not had to do what so many of these other players have had to do.
So that's right, or maybe it's maybe the Yannick-Cinner situation is the way it should be and the others have been harshly treated, but they're different. And there's two aspects of it being different, right? There's both the fact of how quickly the provisional suspension was successfully appealed and overturned.
And the speed of that, it sounds like not everybody is able to work to that timeline in similar cases and there's also the communication, the fact that this has not, none of this has been made public until it's all been resolved. Now again, as you say, that might be the right thing, I don't really know, but it does seem entirely inconsistent.
I think that inconsistency is the big problem because many players kind of get their reputation destroyed in the court of public opinion while this plays out and while they're waiting, whereas Sinner seems to have been able to just keep it all private and then it's only been announced when there's been a kind of resolution.
I think it's important here that we bring up the case of this lower ranked Italian player, and must say this is not a case I knew about until today, a player called Marco Bertolotti from earlier this year, End of last year who tested positive for the same thing, Klosterball, an ATP challenger last year in Lisbon, and then in March of this year the ITIA confirmed that he bore no fault or negligence.
Therefore he wasn't subject to any period of suspension. So he kept playing, he did have his prize money and his points from Lisbon taken away like Sinner has had from Indian Wells. What's unclear to me at the moment is whether there was a statement at the time about Bertolotti's positive test or whether it was all completely kept in the dark like with Sinner.
I don't know the answer to that, but yeah, whenever there's a big doping case, I always feel very out of my depth personally in terms of like, you read the report and it all sounds quite plausible, but then there's a lot of people questioning whether it is plausible.
I find that hard to comment on, but commenting on the process and the transparency is kind of easier I think, and it does seem that the antidoping has got a lot of work to do to sort of restore trust in it and to be treating these cases as equally as they possibly can, because I just don't see how it's fair. There's some differences, but how is it fair that some players are making appeals and they're taking forever and Yennex and I was able to appeal in it, it happens so quickly.
It's a really bad look and then there's also the element of players who haven't even failed positive tests, but of mist tests and they get long suspensions. Yeah, it's a big moment I think for sort of the sports antidoping control.
It's a situation where the communication aspects, that's not sort of, and a kuchamom around, that's not full around the edges because it's just as important that justice is seen to be done as that it is actually done because the whole point of all of this is about people's faith in the sport, people believing what they're watching. So that communication is as much a part of it for me as the process itself and faith in that communication.
I don't know and we will be asking this question of the authorities whether there is a policy on communication. I had a very brief career hiatus working in the press office of the Crown Prosecution Service and my job, part of it was putting out statements, naming people that had been, naming high profile people that had been charged with a crime.
And there was a very clear cut policy on that while they're arrested and being investigated, you don't name them once it reaches charge, they can be named. People have issues, people think it should be different at both ends of the spectrum. But it was an extremely clear cut back black and white policy and as far as I can tell that doesn't exist for anti-doping cases and I think it has to exist, it absolutely has to exist.
I just can't, and separately I can't stop thinking about the fact that whatever you think about what's happened, Janik Senna played and won a Masters 1000 final yesterday knowing that this was coming out today, the build up, I mean he's been playing for the last four months with this hanging over him to various degrees. And he knew it was becoming public today and that's, I mean that is ice in the veins isn't it?
Well, when he played his semi-final match against Alexander's Verve a few nights ago, he celebrated match points more ferociously than I've ever seen him celebrate a match point. And that includes when he won the Australian Open. And I put that down to, I knew nothing of this of course, I put that down to this as a guy who has had some injury issues, some time off he had the tonsilitis period where he didn't play the Olympics.
And he's consistently said, I'm not really at full health, full fitness, I'm not maybe match fit. And he looked not match fit, he looked as though the whole thing was a struggle. I remember there was a moment in that match where Darren Cahill stood up and said, play with your heart. And that's what it looked like he was doing was just, it's not really there, so I'm just going to scrap him, I'm going to fight and he got over the line against As Verve who's been in good form recently.
And he celebrated with the most gutter, all full-throated roar that I've ever heard from Yannick Sinner, who's to say that this wasn't in his mind as well in some way. Because if he's worried about it or if he's had this on his mind which you would expect he would have done then, then that's going to be a moment of, I guess, release at the very least.
And a big element to this now is locker room opinion of Yannick Sinner, I mean that tweet from Dennis Schappelvalov, different rules for different players. You've got to think that there are other players who are having similar thoughts to that.
There are other players that are going through stuff that we don't know about and not receive, right? So this seems to set a precedent now that, how do we not know there are other players that aren't in the pre-disclosure stage of this that are receiving different treatments Yannick Sinner? I don't know, I don't know of any, but... Well, I got an immediate message from a player who was just up in arms about it.
And I think that that happens from time to time and you're seeing that mostly people using social media these days to just get their opinion out there. And look, they've got to be careful because he has been found guilty of nothing in terms of wrongdoing other than having it in his system and losing his points. But that doesn't change how players feel based on everything else they've seen and the feeling that they have that we're being treated differently here.
And that is a failure, isn't it? Because again, the justice scene to be done applies to players as well. They need to have faith in the system. So if they don't, even if they ought to, that is a failure of sorts. That's a communication failure on their part. And this has been a period where, you know, while all this has been kept quiet, Yannick Sinner has, you know, kind of become the face of the ATP really in terms of he's become the World No. 1 in this period.
The ATP went all in in terms of doing him a massive promo video where they got lots of former World No. 1's to say lots of very nice things about him. When I'm filmed in his hometown, it was lovely. It was great. But they've really, you know, promoted and pushed him up. They've pushed him becoming World No. 1 harder than they have kind of Carlos Alcras when he did it. And Medvedev recently as well, like Sinner has been kind of the face of the ATP in these last few months.
I can't stop thinking about the fact that this has been going on during, during, you know, him becoming World No. 1 and everything that's happened over the past, past few months is, it's wild. Yeah. And it does make me wonder, his law is saying the matter is now closed. Well, it doesn't feel closed. It might feel closed in its isolation as a case. But the sport now faces a bit of a reckoning about what to do to restore some faith.
And he's going to kind of be the face of that reckoning, whether he, whether he wants to be or not. Yeah, like the case might be closed for them, but it's just starting for everyone else. Everyone else has just found out about this. We'll have questions. Exactly. And yeah, it's very much against the sort of image that Sinner has created for himself and has kind of been created for him. Like the fact of a sort of Yannick Sinner scandal just doesn't feel real.
And he's going to have to, he's going to have to deal with that. How do we think the locker room backlash might affect? I mean, this, this was going to be a topic of conversation on this podcast anyway in relation to E. Gisheon Take whose received some backlash for things she said this week, Jack Draper, who's received a lot of backlash this week.
Sinner and Draper would double as part. And this is all these are all incredibly different cases, but the running theme is how affected the players get by negative opinion being traded about them on social media and presumably in the locker room as well. locker room hostility from peers. Yeah, I personally think it's possible to read too much into it because it's a few people actually. It's Nick Kirios saying he should get a two year ban for doping. I mean, that's pretty inflammatory.
It is, it's also Nick Kirios and it's Dennis Shapa Valov. It's it's Luca Puy. It's certain people who I'm kind of not surprised it's them. And I don't necessarily. So tennis sangrin David. Okay. Well, there we are. I'm not sure how much stock Yannick Sinner will put in some of those voices, particularly because his view, I think from everything we've read,
I've actually done nothing wrong here. You know, this I will he is responsible for what I'm responsible for it, but I knew absolutely nothing about it. I'm a conscience is clear. And these people can can get lost really is what I can imagine he would probably be thinking. I think he, you know, assuming that that is taken at face value, I would imagine he is mortified by the fact that this has happened because he doesn't want to be talked about like this.
But locker room wise, I don't know, I just I'm just not convinced that it has that much effect or that anybody would actually confront him, for instance. I just don't think that's going to happen. And what about the fact that there will now be a section of tennis fans, commentators, whatever who will always have an us a doping asterisk next his name.
Well, I mean, I think that that's an opinion because there will be that that exists. It will exist. The fact is it has also been over taken by the fact that he's been told that he bears no fault. He wasn't negligent. He wasn't doing it intentionally. I think what's maybe going to be more interesting is going to be what people are prepared to say in those press conferences in a couple of days time.
Is it going to be the ATP preparing every player don't answer anything about Yannick Center or anything to do with doping because that stuff happens. We know it does. Or is it going to be one of those where actually players saying no, I'll say whatever I want because this is actually really important. And there are certain players who won't be told who will if they're asked a question answer it straightforwardly.
And so they're all going to be asked and if they're not asked by somebody else, they'll be asked by us. And I'd say there would be any way, but I'm interested in that because we've got the immediate social media about that. Like I say, I don't think players are going to be confronting Yannick Center in locker rooms, but he's probably going to get told. So and so it's just said this about you in his press conference. What's your reaction? So that whole thing.
And I think it's a debate that needs to be had really I think it's good that if players are airing their opinions or airing their concerns and then maybe the authorities are able to answer some of those concerns. I wonder if the players that he beat in Indian Wells might be more likely to have something to say. Possibly. Ben Shelton. Yannick Struth. Ternasi Kokonakis Yeri Lahedshka. Ben Shelton, I'm looking at you basically. He doesn't mind having a thing or two to say, does he?
I don't know. I just I think this could get quite bumpy for him. I think this could be tough. Judging by the way, he's not really seem to flicker there the last couple of months. I'm not not sure how much difference it'll make to him. I'm sure he hates it, but you know, he seems to be able to perform anyway. But it's certain now it's out in the world. It's out of his control. I do think it's become a very different animal today. He's.
Yeah, I think it's an entirely different prospect. I don't know. I the concept of Yannick's inner in a scandal is so alien. It's. Yeah, that's pretty impossible to predict. But what was expecting when I woke up this morning? No, could be a jet lag fever dream. I don't know. You're all in it. You're all in it with us. Did you want to be a leash? We just did the most random podcast. Should we talk about the match? Well, I mean, all sinners run to the Cincinnati title.
I suppose the thing I was going to say before the story broke was what I've already said about that celebration against Vera. I felt like that encapsulated everything. I think he was much better against Francis Tiafo last night.
I think it was a more convincing performance that one than the semifinal one very close first set Tiafo's had a really good week. He's rolled back two years really to make himself feel like a contender again and a factor. But he couldn't put center away in that first set tie break. It was a wonderful rally of about 33 shots where they're both just middle in the ball, beautiful hitting. And like I say, it's just much more convincing than he was against Vera when it was all a struggle.
And I actually thought before any of this broke, this is a triumphant, fernic center of kind of mind over matter. He is not in great form right now compared to the start of the year. This was nothing like the same form and feeling that this is a convincing player dominating. But he's won anyway. That's what my take away was. Yeah, and I think the hip probably would have been one of the big Yannick Sinner talking points before this morning's news.
He clearly isn't 100% physically right now. I think it sounded like it was far less of an issue in the final than it had been in the semis against Vera. I think this has been a reminder that Yannick Sinner kind of back on hard courts. I think that's where he's played his best tennis so far. And also probably given the physical struggles he's going through right now. I think best of three is helpful for Yannick Sinner.
So going into the US Open, I do have my doubts about him kind of over five sets. I think he would need to be as ruthless at the US Open as he was in Australia earlier in the year where he kind of got through to two sets of other on Djokovic having not lost a set. And he was winning comfortably.
He starts to get himself involved in physical matches, especially in potentially tough conditions in New York. That's kind of where I have my question marks about him at the moment physically. But yeah, like tennis wise, the hip was an issue, but the tennis was okay, not his peak form, but I'm so impressed by how well he's serving.
I was worried that the hit might affect his serve, but you know, kind of think Yannick Sinner, great move, a great ground stroke. He's going to be, he's going to be great on return. He's actually his serve this year, which has been such a pillow of his game. He's way up in the ATP rankings in terms of how he's protecting his serve and we saw that this week.
But all of this now feels secondary to the big question of how is he going to cope with this news being out there and potentially people, you know, a lot of people potentially talking about him. Like that is the Yannick Sinner question now going into the US Open in a way that, you know, we didn't even know this existed. It's a few hours ago.
Yeah, we thought the question is are you still with Anna Cannon Sky? Is Sinner Sky a still a going concern? Do you remember the naive days when we thought that was the question? I was expecting to be talking about court speed. Well, who'd like to talk about another controversy from this week? Poor old Jack Draper. And the, what are we called to be having a name for this? Has to end in gate. Hit bounce gate, bounce hit gate. I do think some people would take issue with poor Jack Draper.
For sure. For sure. There's a lot of people angry at Jack Draper right now. Does anybody deserve, does anybody deserve the abuse that he's getting that like that's what I'm referencing? Anyway, let's, let's preface the story. He's playing Felix O'Jay and the Assim. It's a great match. It's a thriller. It's in a third set. It is match point to Jack Draper on the Felix O'Jay and the Assim. So 1540 I think on the O'Jay, it seems to have either three, five or four, five.
It was on Draper's serve, wasn't it? I think it was on O'Jay, they seem so. Draper served and came in. I think. So glad we decided to recap the facts of the event. Anyway, it is in fact irrelevant. Basically what happens, Jack Draper is at the net. A low, a low volley comes into him that he apparently harf volleys. And coincidentally, it also clips the net and dribbles over. Everything about this point is utterly freakish. There's a very sort of stunned reaction from Draper after.
He doesn't celebrate like he's just won the match. On Pygrag Allen's worth calls Game Set and Match. Everyone is confused. There's an interchange at the net. Everybody seems to think that Draper had rather than a gorgeous little harfolleys, had actually hit the ball into the ground before it then bounced up and went over the net. Draper says, I don't know, I wasn't looking at it, I was looking at you.
I would be happy, totally happy to have a replay determined whether we replay the point that is not available under the ATP rules. Draper says, a replay is not available under the rules. I have to go with how I saw it and how I saw it was that it was a legitimate shot. Therefore, it's Game Set and Match. That sort of goes round and round in circles for quite a long time before they eventually exit stage left and the controversy begins.
Because of course, as pointed out by Felix or J. Lissi, Montcourt, they might not have the replay, but we all do. Now, I have to say, this is one of those replays where it makes me question my eyes because it's almost like a magic eye. I can't quite see it in the replays, but I do trust the opinion of people that do see it very clearly, which is you David. You were absolutely categorical on it as soon as you saw a...
I was watching it like a replay. I was watching it live in here, actually, while you guys would have been, I think, a sleep. It was middle of the night in the UK. I was stayed up to watch this. I must admit, I had no clue what had happened initially because Draper is charging in towards the net. We're on the main camera where he's moving towards. You're looking over, Ojali, it seems, shoulder.
All you see is confusion on the face of Draper and then sort of laughing at, oh my word, I've been given the match kind of thing. It didn't look anything untoward other than just a freaky situation. Then, and I couldn't tell what had happened, Ojali, it seems, then comes to the net and is absolutely adamant. That ball hit your racket and hit the ground and then went up in the air and over. That is not a fair shot. That is not a foul shot.
He argued his case politely, firmly, emphatically with the umpire. For several minutes, I exaggerated and said it was 10 minutes. It felt like 10 minutes that there was just debate in this. The supervisor's called on to the court which never gets anybody anywhere because they can't seem to do anything other than listen to what the umpire said and just say, well he said...
That is a nonsense isn't it? Get me the supervisor so I can have a completely pointless conversation with somebody more senior. But I really understood it from Ojali, I've seen some of these videos. And honestly, you're just looking at this and thinking, has nobody got a replay that they can just have a look at to find out. And bear in mind as a TV reviewer, I haven't seen it yet. This is going on for four or five minutes, we haven't seen a thing.
And Ojali, as he said at the end, he says, if you can tell me without a flicker of a doubt, I 100% that you definitely saw that right, then I will accept it and walk off this court. But I think you're going to look ridiculous when we get out of here and we all see this. And I'm still thinking, this is quite strong. Again, he's being polite, he's not being rude, they eventually depart. And I'm still not on the wiser. Then they show the replay.
Side-on of Draper coming in towards the net, it slows down a little bit and it was immediate. The two commentators said, oh, well, that's Felix's right. The ball's hit Draper's, the edge of Draper's racket, it's gone into the ground, it's come back up, it's hit his strings again, and then it's gone up and over into the edge. I didn't even occur to me that that couldn't be clear to everybody looking at it. And that's one of the really interesting things, because you're not alone, Catherine.
You are not alone. I'm not, this is in a defensive draper, I really accept that he did it and will come onto that. I don't judge him particularly harshly for it personally, but will come onto that. But I just don't see it, honestly, as a magic heart. I just don't see it. The former umpire, Richard Inx, who is one of the most experienced umpires, head of officiating for the ATB for many, many years, somebody we often go to when stories emerge.
He was critical of me and others like me for saying that it's clear, because he said to me that is not clear. And he was defending the official dumb as part of that. And I also would defend the umpire. People were slamming the umpire. You can't see that. Matt would probably like to come in here, because Greg Allen's worth is Matt's absolute favourite all-time umpire. Well, I mean, he has had a couple of these in the last week. He has had a very tough few weeks.
He was the umpire who disqualified Dennis Schappelvalov. He was the umpire who was in the chair when the electronic line calling system failed during the Taylor Fritz match. And the ball was out and yet the guy had hidden out ended up winning the point because of the failure in the electronic line calling. And he didn't sort of step in there. And then he was in the chair here. And look, I think he's called this incorrectly.
I do think there's a difference between Felix Orgiali as scenes view, which is always facing on. And he's hit his return. And he's then looking at the ball and seeing Jack Draper hit it. He's never deviating his path. Whereas the umpire is looking at the ball from the serve and then has to move his head back to where Jack Draper hits it. I think I can totally understand that Greg Allen's worth might not have picked it up in the same way that Felix Orgiali as scene has picked it up.
It strikes me that there's quite a big difference there. The other thing here is that look to me the first replay I saw was really grainy and I couldn't quite tell. Then stuff in a sitsapast came up with a sort of HD version of it. And suddenly it was all very clear to me. And I did think, okay, yeah, that's clear and obvious. I can tell what's happened there. But I do think probably probably like a lesson from football. We found a use for stuff in sitsapast's social media activity.
Everyone in football always thought that video replay would just clear things up. That has not been the case. I do think tennis lends itself to video replay better. And I think it's an absolute no-brainer that video replay needs to come in. And it's, you know, we're going to have it at the US Open I think on about eight chords, something like that. So we need it. But we also need to, I think, keep our expectations in check that sometimes even with a replay it might be hard to tell.
Or people might have different opinions of it. But I do think we've got to be helping out the umpires in those situations. I felt sorry for certainly for Australia's scene because, you know, he shouldn't have lost the match on that point. I felt sorry for the umpire because of the fact that they're on their own and they've got to make a split second decision.
And he can't change his mind just on the strength of the Felix Australia's seems argument, which was polite and was excellent, but isn't going to change the opinion. And then I think kind of the kind of the question is, do you feel sorry for Jack Draper? I think, I think if anyone knew really, probably was Jack Draper.
Like I do think a lot of players have been saying, and you know, just from my very recreational level of playing, you do often know if you've hit the ball straight into the ground. Yeah, and Andy Roddick tweeted, I feel like every time I've ever shanked a ball straight into the ground, I've known that I shanked it straight into the ground. I think he probably did know, but I don't, that doesn't make me particularly judge him harshly for it.
His, his might take, I think, I think number one had that been just not match point, just two all, two all 15 love second set. It doesn't go that way. And I've been waiting for one of these moments where video replay is needed to happen on match point. I think that's why it's caused such a big stir.
Number two, I think, and I remember discussing this as part of one of our tennis free live shows regarding the 2008 Olympics and Fernando Gonzalez and his double hit that it was James Blake, wasn't it? I think it was a volley that he swung at and Blake was saying, you touched that. Yes. And he's kind of never, never forgiven him for, or never, certainly never judged him the same for it.
And I'm not saying these situations are, are the same, but I do think there's an issue here where the player that commits the wrongdoing is absolutely tethered to the split second decision they make in the moment. I think, if Jack Draper had the time froze and he gets to go away and think about what to do, I really don't think he, I think he probably says, no, I don't want to win this way.
Does the right thing, but you can't that there is just no world in which a couple of minutes of all jelly scene pleading with the umpire and you kind of see how you see how everything's playing out and how clear the error is you can go. Actually, you know, I do know that I did hit it into the ground. Let's replay the point you can't you just can't do that you're totally wedded to the split second decision you make when it happens.
And I'm not sure all of us could hold our hands up to doing the right thing in that split second. I'm sure most of us would like to think we would do the right thing given the opportunity to make a considered decision. I believe Jack Draper would too. I just don't think many of the players saying he knew like, yeah, he probably did know, but yeah, I mean sitting here right now, I feel like if he did know, he should have called it on himself.
Would I have done in the heat of battle when when I've just been fighting it out for that long and I've just been told of one and I don't know I don't know what to do because I've never been in that position. It's really easy for me to say. So when I hear all these players saying, well, you do know, I don't I mean, I can only listen to what they're saying, but I also don't I know he seems quite adamant that he didn't know.
So I don't want to call him a liar either. I mean, who am I to say that he's a liar? I certainly I mean, the hate he is getting makes me really uncomfortable. I just don't I just don't think anybody even the most honest people can be absolutely sure that that's not how it would go for them to in that in that specific situation. And again, I think Australia seems rich and there was was telling that like he said Jack, you know, but he also wasn't actually that angry at Jack Draper.
You know, because I think he understands that sort of heat of the moment thing. He was very angry with the on fire, which as I've said is maybe a little harsh but also understandable. He Felix dealt with it, but he didn't because he expressed exactly he wasn't a meek. I'm letting this go, but he was in control the whole time of his very extreme emotions. And I thought that was very impressive. He was and by the way played well too. He played well all week. Again, these ends up being footnotes.
It looked to me like maybe Draper was affected by it. Oh, I think big time because I think he's the sort of guy who who wouldn't like this stuff. You know, he I think I really like Jack Draper. I think he's a good good guy. That's my dealings with him. I think Felix, I'll see him as well. So good week for them tennis wise overall and court. As you all know, I think particularly impressive this last week given he's not been that great all year. He crushed rude again, didn't he?
Yes, exactly. That was the result of the race stood out. But yeah, I did think, wow, you are. I'd be proud of you if you're my son reacting the way you have after that. But look, I mean, it's just absolutely not not really a matter of for debate anymore that if it ever was that tennis needs replays like where's the cost or the down. I mean, apart from a literal financial cost. Yeah, that's all it is. And it might not be. That's all about priorities, right?
The money is there in the sport. If you if you prioritize this as a place to allocate it, which clearly we should be doing. Yeah, I mean, the fact that the US Open is only doing it on eight court speaks like says to me that there are some challenges with bringing it in because otherwise why would they not be doing it on every call, you know, whether that be financial or practical.
I don't know, but like the biggest courts at the biggest events, I'm sure can can afford to have this and you know economically and practically. Yeah, we've got to be bringing it in bringing it in as I said like I don't think it's going to be this magic solution that clears up absolutely everything. I do remember that is sometimes the system malfunctions even I remember that happening on an Andy Murray match at the US Open couple of years ago.
And then even when they did get the replay after a long delay, it wasn't that clear. Right. But I think it would be also easier to accept for players if they at least know that they've had another look at it. Everybody has a look at it together. And at least we're not sort of arguing about what my eyes told me. And knowing as Felix pointed out that the second we all leave the court, yeah, we're going to see the truth of the matter, which is.
And knowing that in that moment, everybody else watching knows more than you is ludicrous. In words of no that job of it, quote, tweeting Stefano, sit to pass, which just about sums up the week that's just gone in tennis. Please make sure this nonsense never happens again. Nailed it. This podcast is brought to you by eHarmony, the dating app to find someone you can be yourself with.
Why doesn't eHarmony allow copy and piece and first messages because you are unique and your conversations should reflect that. EHarmony wants you to find someone who will get you. How are you going to know who gets you? If people send you the same generic conversation starters, they message everyone else. Conversations that actually help you get to know each other. Imagine that. Get who gets you on eHarmony. Sign up today. Ryan Reynolds here from Mint Mobile.
With the price of just about everything going up during inflation, we thought we'd bring our prices down. So to help us, we brought in a reverse auctioneer, which is apparently a thing. Mint Mobile unlimited premium wireless. Headed to get 30, 30, 30, 30, 30, 30, 20, 20, 20, 20, 20, 20, 20, 20, 15, 15, 15, 15, just 15 bucks a month. So give it a try at MintMobile.com slash switch. $45 up from payment to equivalent to $15 per month. New customers on first-term month plan only.
Taxes and fees extra. Speed slower above 40 gigabyte C.T. We all have dreams. Dream home renovations. Dream vacations. Or sending our kids to their dream colleges. But finding straightforward ways to turn those dreams into realistic goals. That's where things get tricky. Merrill understands that. That's why, with a dedicated Merrill advisor, you get a personalized plan and a clear path forward. And, having the bullet your back helps your whole financial life move with you.
So when your plans change, Merrill is with you every step of the way. Go to ML.com slash bullish to learn more. Merrill, a bank of America company. What would you like the power to do? Investing involves risk. Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenerance, Myth Incorporated. Registered broker dealer. Registered investment advisor. Member SIPC. Okay, what controversy would we like to... Ten of attention to next? Shall we talk about the Women's event? Which will include covering Eagish Yontek.
But let's start off talking about the final and the champion, Arena Sabileanka beating Jessica Begula 6.375. In the final, that of course is back-to-back. 1000 finals for Begula having won the title in Canada last week. Arena Sabileanka wearing a red dress again. She won Australia. And coming into form at exactly the right time, having performed pretty horribly, I thought in Canada and that loss to a man around us and over, I was really, really down on her after that. This is a real turn around.
I think there's been a lot of talk about the speed of the court in Cincinnati. Carlos Alcras had things to say. Didn't he after his loss to Gail Malfiece said it wasn't like tennis. Smash to his racket about as violently as you possibly can. But it was great stuff from Arena Sabileanka this week. Yeah, I mean, listen, these were perfect conditions for her. This was Madrid or Wuhan or the places she's loved super fast conditions in the past.
Do you remember when people tried to make Wuhan well then? Exactly. I mean, there were some comparisons being made to the US Open saying that that's fast of this year too. Although I subsequently heard that for players that were practicing that it didn't feel as fast as Cincinnati did, which seemed on the extreme scale from what people were saying, perfect for Sabileanka. But even that aside, look at what she's done to people. She's just destroyed a English film taking straight sets.
She just destroyed Jessica Tagula. The fact that stood out from that match to me was how despairing Tagula was towards her box. And how they were just desperately trying to keep her mind in it. Mark Null just kept saying, your chance is going to come. And actually, it did come. She got one break back. But it never fell, as though this is going to be a match that turns around. Because everything was on Sabileanka's racket. And my mind just keeps going back to Wimbledon.
When we saw her, what a crest fall and figure she was at the outset of that tournament. When we were in that press conference and she told us, you know, I don't think I'm going to be able to play this tournament in two days later. She's withdrawn. And that was the shoulder problem, which she just couldn't figure out how to solve. I mean, who knows exactly what it was. I'm not exactly sure. But I mean, trapped nerves and things like that. They're horrible, but then they pass.
And it just looks as though whatever was wrong has dissipated in the weeks that have followed. Yeah, and I think the big thing for me is that, yeah, like only a week ago, she really didn't look convincing at all, even on that serve. It was coughing up a lot of double faults. And I did wonder whether it was the, yeah, the lingering shoulder problem. But that serve was just firing.
And Jessica Baguula pretty much gave as big a compliment as you can possibly give a player, saying that it kind of felt like she was playing Serena. And also maybe I might have preferred to play Serena. It's a great line, wasn't it? Yeah. And like, that's how good Sabileanka was by the way. Sabileanka was behind her serve, how dominant didn't drop a point on serving the second set until she went to serve it out.
And yeah, like we go back to Australian Open, that was the most dominant run to a title that I think we've, or big titles that we've had this year, really. She was just swatting players aside. And it was that vibe again in Cincinnati. And you're right. I think the court conditions in US Open are going to be very important for how Sabileanka performs. Because, honestly, frankly, she's kind of fumbled some US Open, Sabileanka. Like, she should have won last year's final against CocoaGolf.
Look, CocoaGolf did brilliantly to turn it around and got the crowd involved and started extracting some errors. But that match was on Arena Sabileanka's racket. And I will never forget the 2021 semi-final against Leyla Fernandez, which she should have won as well. Now, who knows whether she would have won the final. But it feels like conditions have been quite good for her in New York in the last few years. And she's kind of let them slip. But she's taken advantage in Cincinnati.
And that's big because Sabileanka does not win that many titles. Like, I know she's been easily the second best player in the world for the past few years. But her titles have actually not been all that numerous. You know, she won Australia a couple of times. She's won Madrid once. But nothing else in the last three years pretty much. So to get a title going into the US Open, I think is significant.
And given the doubts around Gough and Rebecca and Shviantec, it feels to me that Sabileanka has kind of asserted herself as the US Open favourite. Me too. Me too, yeah. Does it depend on how quick the US Open court side? There's a lot of... Some people are saying they're a lot slower than Cincinnati. Oh really? Well, I mean, I think if they were a lot slower, that would maybe make me change my view. But then I don't look at other players and think, well, it's definitely her.
How big of the doubts around Shviantec? Pretty big, I would say, based on that performance. And again, that was a super fast court, too fast for her, really. And Sabileanka, you know, she kind of held on to make it semi-competitive at the end. But that was a pretty chastening defeat. And coming on the back of comments, making it clear that it's all a bit much of the moment. Yeah, so she...
Egeshwantek in her after a quarter-final victory, so the day prior to her match against Arena Sabileanka in an interview with Skysports. On the court, immediately after the win, she's talking about how she is. And she's saying, she basically says, pretty, pretty frazzled. And she goes on to say, there's too much tennis, which I don't think is a controversial opinion to express.
No, and I think the sort of details of that remark are the fact that quite quietly, or maybe kind of stealthily, like the WCA has ramped up the number of mandatory tournaments now for players. Like, you know, it's 10,000 events, I think, 6,000 at 3,500s as well. And the 1,000s, a lot of them are two weeks. And she's going deep in pretty much all of them. Like, I love that she said that. I think she's right. I think there is too much tennis. We say it all the time.
And I think the thing is though, she's going to say, she doesn't normally say many things like that. And I think the reason is because, you know, I think she finds that there is backlash, and she maybe doesn't want that. And she wants to stay in her own zone and in her own bubble. And because that's when she performs best. And I think, you know, there was then some comments from Kaffel and Kov, wasn't there on Twitter, which were just pretty horrible, really.
I don't know whether we use film tech saw those, have absolutely no idea. I think whether she explicitly saw those, I mean, I hope she's not following you if you can, if you can, if you can, if you can, if you can. I suspect she's not. Whether she was specifically aware of those comments, I think she would have been aware that there was backlash against what she says. And I think it would have affected her. To what extent I don't know. But as you say, there's a reason why she doesn't say staff.
I personally wish she would say more, because she's the world number one, and she can have impact. I lament the fact she doesn't say more. But then I see something like this happen, and I do, I get it. Because I think we're sleeping on quite a big problem here in tennis. There is too much tennis, and these players are getting burnt out. And it's, you know what's to hear it? Do they multi, multi millenaires complaining about too many things?
There are too many opportunities to earn millions of pounds in play sport for a living. It's a tough file in to get out. But our agendas are all aligned here. We want to watch these players play well for as long as possible, and being as good shape as possible. And you can't just keep stretching the dough thinner.
And I really, I know this is pushing my agenda on this, but I think Loki, the extension of these 1000 events to two weeks, is one of the most egregious things that has happened in this sport recently. I think it's horrendous. Yeah, I don't know to what extent you can put that back in the bottle. You can't. I think the one thing they can do is try to reduce the extension to two weeks and make it more like nine days so that you get an extra weekend in or something. But they won't.
I was telling these events, hey, all this extra money that you're now earning, you're not going to anymore. I don't think you're going to be able to. You're not going to be able to. The pale that that might end up happening like to be trimmed. Okay. Because I don't think the backlash is going to stop anytime soon. And I think that they're going to find, some of these events are going to find more and more players just not there. And that's damaging in itself.
You have going to confel the calf is a player who used to wear as a badge of honor. How many times he played tennis matches in a year and he would play singles and doubles. And it was extraordinary what he could do physically and how much kind of time he would put into playing tennis matches. And I respect him because that's how he wanted to go about his career. But that did not build the sport. That didn't really do it any good. I mean, he was a champion. He was a great player.
I had a lot of problems with him during his career when I was on the tour at the same time. Those subsequently we, you know, you retire in his case and you get older. And he's always been nice to me ever since. And he's helped us set up interviews for us and all sorts of things for this podcast. So I've warmed to him in recent years. But he sounded incredibly old fashioned the way he said that I felt. And I'm like, you know, what you're talking about really. For a start, leave her alone.
But also just in terms of what's actually good for the sport here. It's about players peaking and being fresh when it matters. Not just how many matches you can play in a year and grind out. That's no good to anybody. It was pretty, it was pretty gross. What he had to say really and he really doubled down on it. Yeah, it was, it was grim. And I think just, you know, the question of Egoschfield on tech at the US Open. Obviously she is capable of winning the tournament.
You know, she's won it before. And she's won plenty of tournaments on hard courts as well. If the conditions are slower, I think that would help her. Certainly in a matchup against Sabilenka. I do think there's a little pattern re-emerging of her losses since Roland Garros, you know, Putin's saver at Wimbledon, Junction went at the Olympics, Arena Sabilenka, here, where there hasn't been much of a plan B. And it's been, it's sort of just got away from her quite quickly.
There might have been little moments of resistance, but generally quite a lot of panic in there. And like, kind of just not using the full depth and breadth of her game. Like, I think if you go back and watch when she won the US Open, she used to defend a lot more. And she used to sort of hang in rallies physically a lot more. That isn't happening. And I don't know whether that's a mindset thing or whether it's a physical thing because she's feeling so burnt out.
Maybe a combination of everything, but she feels quite vulnerable at the moment. And given that she has kind of only one, a hardcore slam once, that feels like the anomaly. Actually, her performances at the hardcore slam have been, that she's been vulnerable against a lot of players. So, look, it's absolutely fascinating. But right now, I would definitely put Sabileko quite a bit ahead of Srivand taking the packing order. Back to back finals, and a title is Jessica Bagoula in the US Open Mix.
It's a good question because I would be pretty surprised if Jessica Bagoula won the US Open just because... Is she in the mix to get beyond the courses? She should get beyond the courses, but then she should have done about eight times. No. Well, sometimes she plays fiancee called Barcy in those four times. But I mean, come on to have done it zero times. Right, yeah. Yeah, there's a problem there.
She's got a problem, and I don't think that problem is solved by reaching back to back finals in Canada and Cincinnati. It's really impressive, especially the fact that she played the Olympics as well. Like, she's gone through this series of tournaments, which are incredibly difficult and done so well. And she's talking about how good she's feeling physically, which is encouraging. I think doubles is far less of a thing for her now. She might end her, but it's not going to be...
And I do wonder how that will change things that doubles has just dropped down the agenda. Because we did talk about that. It's quite a significant factor. You know, all matches kind of being a bit the same. And that's why I'm not encouraged on her behalf by the fact that she's done this in Canada and Cincinnati. Because, well, yeah, that's not where you need to be doing it. Good for you, like, they're good events, and well done for winning.
But I'm afraid I end up feeling like you're just hitting ceiling all the time. And where's your next level? Because these other players are going to come in. Somebody's going to peek against you. Do you have the gear to see them off? Which American woman is going deeper? Which American woman is going deepest at the US Open? Ask me in a few days. Amanda and Isaam-no. Well, why not? Why not? Yeah, look. She's got a right chance. Yeah. That's all I'm... She's got a decent enough draw.
If you're ever going to answer Amanda and I say, I've got to answer that question. It does feel like now. Sorry, I will double down. Amanda and Isaam-no. Who's the favourite on the men's side? It's another great question. And is Tiafo in the mix? No, Tiafo is not in the mix. No, Tiafo is not in the mix. I feel that I think it's really interesting. Before we had the whole center thing, I got this whole memory of how hard it is to keep up your form or year and be good at the US Open.
And I mean, that's kind of feder through a bit of a... I mean, that theory still applies if not more so, David, keeping it with form through two provisional suspensions. Yes, but not what I mean is that that sin as a story is just overtaking everything. So there's hardly room and point in talking about it than else.
But I was thinking back to when Jim Courier would play so well in the first half of the year and then just, you know, you would think you were so open would be perfect for him and American in New York and all the rest of it. And he would just be kind of on fumes by the time he got here. And he got to one final in all those years of being world number one. Raffa and the Dow, so often when a Ruff would just never not often be at his best at this tournament.
He won a couple of times, but he often was injured or he was burnt out or whatever. And I think it is tough. I just think it's so fascinating because of Jockovich having fulfilled the stream of the Olympics. Does that make him loose and even more dangerous? Does that take an edge off his competitiveness? The reason I came up with the players kind of burning out because didn't... didn't Alcras look a bit frazzled to you the other day? Yeah, the day?
You know, and it happened to him last year, he ran into Medvedev and he just looked flat that day. So I don't know who's the favourite. I really don't know. I'd probably say Jockovich. Yeah. I would say Jockovich right now. Remember when we did that, we all Jockovich retire on the spot, show like two weeks ago. Oh yeah, when I was saying not sure Jockovich has got the level anymore. Like he's showing that he's... When else did he wasn't in the mix? It was, you know.
We've had like... We've had like proof of life from no Vat Jockovich in the Olympics. Like we know that... He's the best of three though. Best of three, but... The level is still going to be there over best of five. Okay, you have to manage it physically. He's been practicing without his knees leave on. So, you know, I think he's trending in the right way there as well. I think there's just bigger question marks around what's thinner because of everything we've just talked about.
And Alcarez, because of David saying how he looked frazzled. And I never thought I'd see Carlos Alcarez react like that, smashing his racket. I've seen him chuck his racket, but not angrily smash it. But if he was ever going to, I do think suffering a loss, kind of which he's never really suffered before in a major final, being the Olympics, desperately wanting to win. Like we said, that might create a hangover. And look, it might last one tournament. It might have got it out of his system.
And I still think over best of five, given everything that he's shown this year, Carlos Alcarez is right there as one of the favourites. But this is a bigger question mark to me than there are over sort of motivation levels for the Ocovich, which is one, but it's not as big as this one that I have over Alcarez. Okay. David, I will be pressing you further on future podcasts. Good. That's what we're here for. And we do have quite a lot of future podcasts coming up.
In fact, we're doing a podcast a day for the next sort of 4,000 years. Tomorrow, we're going to be recording our US Open Relived edition for 2024. We're going to be talking about the history of Super Saturday. David has done some awesome interviews for that with, can I say? Sure. With Mary Carrillo and Pat Cash. Pat Cash, who was involved in the original Super Saturday of 1984.
Super Saturday for anyone that doesn't know is when they used to play on the second Saturday, the tournament, both men's semi-finals and the women's finals. And then the men obviously, the winning men had to come back and play the final the very next day, which is wild, that that used to happen. Yeah. And Mary Carrillo, who was covering it and to remember it very well. So, now they've got some great stories. Yeah. It's going to be a great show.
That exclusively for friends of the tennis podcast will be recorded and up tomorrow. The first day is our live show at the Green Space or off Broadway debut. I'm going to keep calling it that. I had an American friend visiting me in London last week and she laughed out loud and I called it that. She'd been the first person to question it. Yeah. It was a shame. It wasn't the reaction I hoped for. Anyway, that will be Thursday night.
It has sold out. Thank you to everybody that has bought a ticket and will be coming. We can't wait to see you there. We'll be talking about it. What will we be talking about? Virtual tickets are still available and we'll put the link to get those in our show notes and they're in the YouTube. They will be in the YouTube description. They will be in the YouTube description as well. They're $10 and $5 for friends of the tennis podcast. And they allow you to either watch live or catch up.
Absolutely, because of course, we'll be on at 745 local time. But that is quite late in the UK and not even my mum has said she will definitely be up watching it live. Mine has said she definitely will eventually. All of that in the show notes. From Friday, it's Daily Pods, Draw Day, Media Day, Live Show Preview on Sunday and then 14 Daily Pods with a review show for friends of the tennis podcast. Right after, it's going to be good. It's going to be great. David's already over the jet lag.
No, really, it's going to be great. We can't wait. Do hit like and subscribe if you're with us on YouTube. It does help us out. And of course, we'll be back with our live show on YouTube previewing the US Open, answering your questions as well. That'll be on Sunday. So look out for the link to that. We have a mascot for this episode. That mascot is Mocker, Mocker is owned by Charlie, a four year old red mull miniature Labra Doodle. Oh, that's good. It's good dog, David.
Lives with her parents, Kristen and Charlie, in Jersey City, New Jersey. Mocker is a firm believer that hashtag ball is life. Her favourite place in the world is her local dog park, which is where she spent thousands of hours chasing a tennis ball. Mocker also loves sitting on the couch at home and watching tennis with her family. Recent highlights include watching Carlos Alcribz were mumbled in and Coco Gough win the US Open. Lovely stuff. Hello to Mocker.
You don't see many miniature Labra Doodles. Usually see the larger varieties. So it's a bit lovely. Lovely stuff. Hello to our mascots, of course, darling, Darwin, rather dearly departed, no longer with us. But still with us in spirit and supporting my terrible predictions. David and Frances, Matt, Hyder and Soma. Hello to Billie Jean. She's sponsored by Billie Jean King and Alana Klaus. We have our top folks and executive producers, Greg, Chris, Jamie and Jeff.
And Matt, we have our first New York shout outs. And we start with Kate and Jeff, Kate and Jeff Cochran, who are in Redmond, Washington, near Seattle. Oh, that Washington, Washington State. How are we spelling, Jeff? With a J. So it like our top folk, and executive producer. Like top folk, Jeff and like Tarrango. Correct. Yes. Any other info? Only that their dogs, Barney and Oli, were disappointed that their two-legged humans were too slow to sign up for pet sponsorship.
Oh. You'll get your chance. They do fly off the shelves to the pet sponsorship. End of the year in December. Remember when I first suggested pet sponsorship, David? And David was like, no, I was paying for that. Nobody's doing that, Catherine. Come on. We have about like 70 years. People send us dog pictures. It's amazing. Thank you, Jeff. And Kate? Yes. Thank you very much. We've also got Michael Anderson, who is in New York. Right, Michael. How perfect, New York State, or New York City?
New York, New York. Fabulous. What do we know about Michael? To you. Sorry. David's been on holiday, too. Wow. We pick it up, man. Well, it's kind of awkward to say, because Michael just says something so nice. He says, you've been a mainstay of my life for over a decade. And I couldn't imagine the tennis season without the tennis podcast. Oh, Michael. That is lovely, Michael. And you got Kevin Anderson. Who wants to say his name's Michael David. I see what you've done there.
Michael, you got David singing on your show, too. Yeah. True, a rare gem. Yeah. You know what to do. Thanks, Michael. And finally, we've got Marion, who is in Mainz, Germany. And Marion said, last year, my wife Martina and I wore our tennis podcast merch in Bad Hamburg and to the US Open. Legends. We know Marion and Martina. Yes. And Marion says, this year, my tennis highlight so far has been Stuttgart, where one, we ran into Emma Radakana at breakfast.
Two, one, I will some racquet sign bones, Jiburr. And three, quarter post match, sign tennis ball from Egaschiontech, our favourite player. Wow. What an experience. What an experience. Totally nailing tennis. I would say, encountering a tennis player at breakfast really is having a tournament experience, isn't it? Oh, Marion, that's lovely. Thank you for supporting us once again. Thank you to all our friends at the tennis podcast.
You are the reason that we are here back in tennis podcast towers, David's got the groceries in. I've already made them a bagel. It was so great. I was flagging before that this would have been a lower energy podcast without the bagel folks. So many thanks, David. It is going to be a cracking fortnight. Thank you for joining us live if you have done on YouTube. Smash that like and subscribe button and join us for our next 18, 19, something like that. There about.
Let's go with 4,000, like you said. Yeah, 4,000 pods coming at you from New York folks. We will speak to you very soon indeed. We all have dreams. Dream home renovations. Dream vacations. We're sending our kids to their dream colleges. But finding straightforward ways to turn those dreams into realistic goals, that's where things get tricky. Marion understands that. That's why with a dedicated Marion advisor, you get a personalized plan and a clear path forward.
And having the bullet your back helps your whole financial life move with you. So when your plans change, Marion is with you every step of the way. Go to ml.com slash bullish to learn more. Merrill, a bank of America company. What would you like the power to do? Investing involves risk. Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fener and Smith Incorporated, registered broker dealer, registered investment advisor, member SIPC.