Along with the majority of avid tennis followers I have to admit that I’m a huge Roger Federer fan. I was a lukewarm fan when he won the Wimbledon Junior crown at the age of 17, but became a drooling disciple when he beat Pete Sampras, the defending Wimbledon champion, in his first try in the main draw at the age of 19. He lost in the following year then went on to win 5 in a row. A feat he just repeated at the US Open a month ago, the only player to accomplish this feat in 84 years since Bill Tilden did it back in the nineteen thirties.

To me, it was the way he won, rather than the fact that he did win. It was the semifinal match with Novak Djokovic that opened my eyes to the fact that Roger was back on form. For the first time since his bout with mononucleosis he played like the old Roger we admire and love. He was sharp, quick around the court, graceful, imaginative with his shots, and intuitive with his shot selection. All the attributes that have made him the best player to ever play the game, and the skills that have been missing for the entire 2008 season. Sure he made a few finals, won a couple of tournaments, he can still beat most players when he’s only playing about 95% efficiently, but it hurt to watch him lose so often and to play so poorly. He is a better player than Nadal on every surface other than clay, and I predict he will be back as the number 1 player in 2009.

He will kick off the 2009 season at the Australian Open where he will be seeded second, and if everything goes according to plan he should meet Andy Murray in the semifinal,a repeat of the very one-sided 2008 US Open final.

Roger is chasing Sampras for the most Single Grand Slam titles, he’s one behind, and now with the effects of the mono virus behind him the odds must be in his favour to pass Sampras in 2009. Judging by his performance in New York it is apparent that he has regained his game and his confidence, which is wonderful news for his fans, but not such good news for his competitors.

He seems to have been around for ever but he’s only 27, he’s earned more than $43 million in prize money, and heaven knows how much with endorsements. It could be a sign of age because he recently admitted to having some thoughts about his future after his tennis career ends. He is deeply involved with his Foundation, and has briefly contemplated marriage and becoming a Father. He actually said, “I have started to think about the future more seriously, things like family and marriage have crossed my mind.”

He’s always positive, and said about his performance in 2008, “I had a good year, 3 titles including a major.” For any other player he would be correct, but from Roger we expect much more.

Why do the four major tournaments combine men’s and lady’s competitions? If there is a legitimate reason, then it has eluded me.

Tennis is often compared to golf. Both sports are individual sports, and nobody gets paid unless they win, or at least play well enough to place in the money. Players do not have million dollar contracts, like soccer or basketball players, nobody pays their expenses and nobody pays them when they get sick or are injured. Tennis players are on their own, and like golfers they are required to play a certain number of events each year, and they regulate their sport with their own elected players association. But unlike golf, the tournaments that comprise the four Majors are combined. Now when the British Open Golf Tournament is played at St. Andrews or some other equally difficult venue, the Men’s event is staged for Men only, and when the Women’s event is staged, weeks or months later, it is for Ladies only. So why don’t we initiate two separate Australian open tournament for men and women at Wimbledon, or at Roland Garros, the US and the Australian Opens? The facilities stand empty for most of the year. Two events should increase the total attendance over just one, and it would provide an additional opportunity for some people who cannot make it to the one event, to have a chance to see professional tennis at another time. Wouldn’t it be great to have two Wimbledons? Two Australian Opens?

I know the reason this is not going to happen. And the answer will stir up a storm of controversy. Of course it all has to do with Money!

First let me state that I’m a firm believer for equal pay for equal work. I’m delighted that Billy Jean King managed to persuade the organizers and sponsors of Tennis tournaments to offer the same amount of prize money to both sexes. Federer and Serena Williams both took home $1.2 million for their respective victories in the US Open. But here’s the rub, as Shakespeare would have said, Federer played 23 sets and Serena only played 14. The two runners up, Andy Murray and Jelena Jankovic, played 24 and 16 sets respectively. Now I’m sure that someone keeps statistics on the time each player spends on court, but I’ll bet that both men finalists spent close to double the amount of time playing and entertaining the crowds as the two lady finalists. Is this fair? Should both receive the same remuneration? I believe that men’s tennis is subsidizing the lady’s tour, and that the lady’s tour cannot stand on its own, and continue to offer equal amounts of prize money. Fortunately for the US Open officials the lady’s final featured an American player, had the final been played between two Russian lady’s with unpronounceable names the stands would have been far from filled.

The upcoming Australian open 2009 will be shown on TV in depth, I suggest you track the attendance of the lady’s matches in the early rounds, and then ask yourself why these players are being paid the same for playing just two sets of mediocre tennis as two men who hammer each other for five sets and 3-4 hours. It just isn’t fair!

For the thirty year span from 1946 to 1976 only four non-Australian men hoisted the trophy at The Australian Open Tennis Championships. Since 1976 Australia, the host country, has not had a winner of its own competition. Once the most dominant power in tennis Australia, has been overtaken by many ‘new’ countries who have produced quality tennis players that have pushed Australia off the tennis map. Just two Aussie men remain in the top 100 players on the ATP tour, Leyton Hewitt currently ranked 59^th., and big serving Chris Guccione ranked 80^th.

Australia is mired in the 2^nd. tier of the Asia-Oceanic group of countries, and the once proud winner of 28 Davis Cups is unlikely to advance to tier one for at least two more years or longer. Tennis Australia has hired a new Spanish coach to train its players on clay at its newly opened facility in Barcelona. This facility joins those it maintains in Canberra and London. Felix Mantilla has played a major role in establishing Spain as one of the ‘new’ tennis powerhouse countries with 5 players ranked in the top 20, and of course Nadal who is ranked Number 1.The Australian tennis authorities hope that Mantilla can start a rebuilding program that will restore Aussie tennis back to where it belongs. A tall order for any coach.

The Australian Open 2009 may only have 2 or 3 qualifiers representing the host country, a sad comment on the status of tennis in Australia, especially so since in former decades it had as many as 30 platers entered, and as many as 8 seeded players. The giants of Australian tennis are still household names throughout the world, Rod Laver, Roy Emerson, Ken Rosewll, Lew Hoad, John Newcombe, Tony Roche, Patrick Rafter and so on and so on, no other country in the world has such a list.

Rod Laver the left handed ‘Rocket’ is the only player to have won two Grand Slams, a Grand Slam is defined as winning all four major tournaments in a single calendar year. Laver did it twice! No modern era player has equalled this feat, Andre Agassi won all four Major tournaments but not in the same year. Neither Sampras nor Federer ever won the French, and Borg never won in Australia.
Roy Emerson won more titles than any other player, a total of 28, and he is followed closely by John Newcombe with 25.

Australian tennis is a tradition in the sport, and somehow it must regain its former glory. Hiring coaches, building new facilities, pumping money into junior player development programs will all help, but is it enough? Are young Australians motivated to be like their famous Grand parents, or are other sports occupying their time and capturing their interests? When the 2009 Australian Open begins in January it will dominate Australian TV and radio, the seating in the stands will all be sold out, and the crowds jamming the outside venues will be jostling for a position to watch the action on the big screen TV’s. There is no lack of interest, just a more competitive emerging world.

Whenever Venus steps on the tennis court she brings with her an aura of grace and professionalism that is so rare among the new crop of female players. Even as a kid with the beaded braided hair, she had a special quality that separated her from the balance of the field. Whether she wins or loses her attitude never changes, and she never loses her composure on or off the court. Venus has won 37 titles, earned more than $20 million in prize money, hit the hardest service of any female player, past or present, and has become the Queen of Wimbledon. She has won 2 US Open titles and 4 Wimbledon titles, and you can bet she will be back to defend her title on the grass in 2009. Her sister found out how much winning Wimbledon means to Venus. Its almost as if Venus is saying to her kid sister, “It’s OK for you to win in New York, or Melbourne, but not in London!” Her determination to win on ‘her court’, as she considers Wimbledon to be, takes he game to a level that leaves Serena gasping for air. Venus never falters at Wimbledon as she does so often against her sister at other venues. It’s almost as if she takes pity on her and unconsciously lets her win. In New York she was winning 5-2 and 5-3, and proceeds to lose in two tie breakers 7-6, 7-6, while not converting on 10 break point opportunities. The odds are against this happening, if both players are focused. Obviously one player wasn’t.

Currently ranked number 8 in the world, Venus has reduced the number of tournaments that she enters, so even if she wins she doesn’t move up in the rankings because she doesn’t earn enough points. She says she could care less about the rankings and whether she is 8^th. or 12^th. She has not decided whether to compete in the 2009 Australian Open in January, my guess is that unless Serena can convince her to join her in the Doubles competition, Venus will not play in Melbourne.

Venus has become such an accomplished grass court player that she might opt to play just a few tournaments to keep her game in tune, and concentrate on playing at Wimbledon each summer. She could easily win the title another 4 times with no problem. Who’s going to beat her? Not her sister, she’s already shown her that, not Sharapova she’s too inconsistent and prone to injury, and none of the others are even close. So the Queen might reign for a quite a while if she stays healthy. Playing on grass is easy on the body, especially the feet and legs, and the regal atmosphere of Wimbledon transports Venus to a place so far removed from the place of her birth, that she feels inspired by its sereneness and traditions. She fits to a tee! Long live the Queen!

Ana Ivanovic is reported to being close to signing a shoe and apparel deal worth a cool $10 million a year for 10 years. Both Adidas and Nike are negotiating with her agent, and for Nike who already sponsors the Williams Sisters and Maria Sharapova it would be a Royal Flush of the top ladies players on tour. Maybe Ana will feel more of an equal as she faces these opponents across the net knowing that she is part of the millionaires ‘club’. She is planning to participate in a warm-up tournament in Adelaide early in January prior to the opening of the Australian Open 2009 in Melbourne. She hasn’t played well since her win in the French Open 2008 at Roland Garros and her elevation to the number 1 spot, and after her disappointing performance in New York at the US Open she has been relegated to number 3 behind Serena Williams and her countrywoman Jelena Jenkovic.

It may be of some consolation for her to know that she has been voted as the Sexiest Female Player for the third straight year by the Tennis Writers Assoc. I didn’t get to vote, but she would have been my choice too. Recently Ana was asked what sport she would like to learn besides tennis, and her answer was Surfing. I’m sure she will find someone in Australia to show her the basics, if it’s possible to find a location away from the eyes of the masses of photographers who follow her everywhere.

Ana has family located in Melbourne, and it is why she lists the city as one of her favourite places. She was the runner-up in 2008 to Maria Sharapova, and with Maria’s appearance still in doubt she must feel confident that she will do better in 2009, incidentally she also beat Venus on her way to the final.

She is currently participating in the Pan Pacific Open in Tokyo, claiming that she is healthy and working hard. Her Japanese racket sponsor Yonex has announced the introduction of a new model of racket especially designed for Ana, it is very light to handle and she will use the racket exclusively until it is made available to the public later next year. She attended a formal function in Tokyo together with Roger Federer where she commented that she admired Roger’s ability to handle the pressure of being the Number 1 player, and all that goes with the prestigious position. She admitted that she now has some understanding of the continual pressure he must be under. She hopes to regain the coveted position, and promises to handle the honour better next time. She also added, that winning her second Major tournament was more important than being Number 1 again.

When Ana is off the tennis court she tries to continue her education by having a private tutor instruct her in her two favourite subjects, philosophy and psychology, but like so many other 20 year olds, it’s the mathematics she hates. She better learn to add and subtract in a hurry if she is to become the newest $100 million baby!