[Oberjej]

Has anyone seen Evert's commentary on Justine's sudden retirement in this month's issue of Tennis Magazine? I'm stunned.

There's no online link that I can find, so I'm retyping the front matter, which in particular struck me. Forgive me if there are typos.

*******

Adieu?

by Chris Evert
page 10
Tennis Magazine, August 2008


Nobody saw it coming. Just weeks before her 26th birthday and the start of the French Open, the tournament she had dominated for the past three years, Justine Henin called it a career. Stunned as I was, I could relate to her situation. When I was 24, I thought I was through. I had been playing professionally for about eight years, had reached No. 1, and was looking over my shoulder at young players like Tracy Austin. I wondered if there was anything left for me to accomplish. I was also married and the fire to compete just wasn't there. As a result I took four months off and got away from the game, which did me a world of good. After the break, I felt revitalized and was ready to return to the tour.

So while I understand how Henin feels, I was surprised so was so definite in her announcement.

I'm curious as to why she didn't take six months to a year off to recharge and see if that would rejuvinate her. From Bjorn Borg and Martina Hingis to Andre Agassi and Jennifer Capriati, tennis has a rich history of great players who retire or take long breaks in their primes. And most of them come back. Perhaps the Williams sisters have been right all along. By wandering in and out of the game and doing what they want in life, they're the ones who have avoided burnout...

*****
If you want to read the whole piece, which then focuses on Henin's distinguished career, you'll have to score a copy of Tennis Magazine. I just don't feel like typing the whole thing.
*****
My reactions.

First off, the depth and breadth of this woman's hypocrisy is really quite astounding. She slashes and burns Serena Williams publicly a few years back in her open letter for doing more or less precisely what Evert herself did, taking a break (though longer, and while nursing a bum knee at the same time)... At basically the same age. Now she says she wondered, at that point in her life, if there was anything left for her to accomplish... The hunger for the sport wasn't there. Gee, I wonder how THAT happens?

I always said that Evert's Open Letter to Serena was about personal regrets, but I have always thought along a different angle... That Evert resented the fact that Serena took time to have a life (after knee surgery and recurring knee problems), when she herself didn't afford herself the same luxury... Because, after all... One must LIVE, EAT, and BREATHE tennis, right? There's no room for tennis players to be real people, right? Now I don't know what to think. Evert WAS Serena at one point in her life. Successful and accomplished, but unfulfilled and wanting. Which makes the hypocriscy behind her open letter ever more, well, hypocritical. Then she goes on to say that the greats have needed breaks at times... Yet she didn't give Serena Williams a break, the same break other greats needed, including herself, when she decided to launch her attack her a few years back.

Second, "Perhaps the Williams sisters have been right all along." Um, what? While Venus has always had outside interests, she has NEVER taken an extended break from the game that wasn't injury induced. NEVER. Not once. While Venus Williams has always done what she wants and has sought success on a variety of fronts, she has NEVER "wandered in and out of the game". She has ALWAYS been there when her body allowed it. ALWAYS. Once again, we have a situation where the tennisheads fails to distinguish between the two. I understand what Serena went through and relate to it totally. I've been there in my own life. And I think it's wrong to criticize her for being a normal, functioning young adult who is torn by the demands and desires of life. But they simply REFUSE to see Venus as a different person. It just goes to show that, anytime you see a sentence that begins with, "The Williams Sisters...", what you're about to read has about a 95% chance of being total hogwash that should be shoveled onto a pile and allowed to develop into premier fertilizer, not committed to the written word that casual fans of the sport might actually READ, and BE INFLUENCED BY.

Rant over. But I wasn't about to let this one go.

[pongeystrhjst]

Speaking of the Williams Sisters, I think Maria Sharapova has taken somewhat the approach that the WS has done. Taking well-timed breaks whether they were injury related or not to make sure they won't burn out. At this pace, the WS may play into their 30s.

[Oberjej]

Speaking of the Williams Sisters, I think Maria Sharapova has taken somewhat the approach that the WS has done. Taking well-timed breaks whether they were injury related or not to make sure they won't burn out. At this pace, the WS may play into their 30s.

I'd agree with that for the most part, Patrick. (Though I'd still argue that all of Venus' absences, if folks want to call them that, have been forced by injury or health concerns; the one this spring may have been personal... Where the hell is Hank?)

Again, that would beg the argument that perhaps the women should be allowed to play as much or as little as their bodies will allow. If Lindsay wants to skip the French, fine. If Venus and Serena want to keep giving Indian Wells the finger, fine. If Wooden Spoon Champion Nuria Llagostera Vives wants to pass on 2009 Wimbledon to save herself the shame, fine.

[georgshult]

I don't really understand the outrage. Evert is basically saying she was wrong, Serena was right. Shouldn't you be happy? I don't get it.

[Oberjej]

I don't really understand the outrage. Evert is basically saying she was wrong, Serena was right. Shouldn't you be happy? I don't get it.

One could look at it that way. But if all of this was the case (I haven't been a close fan of tennis long enough to remember Evert's break from the game or the fact that she was burned out or didn't have the hunger for it), then why did she write it in the first place? Why go there when you went through sometime quite similar yourself at almost precisely the same age?

And if that was or is or might at some point be one's view of Serena (which I'd still argue is/was/would be unfair), then why does Venus always have to be lumped into the generalization? It's not just unfair; it's blatantly untrue.

[georgshult]

One could look at it that way. But if all of this was the case (I haven't been a close fan of tennis long enough to remember Evert's break from the game or the fact that she was burned out or didn't have the hunger for it), then why did she write it in the first place? Why go there when you went through sometime quite similar yourself at almost precisely the same age?

And if that was or is or might at some point be one's view of Serena (which I'd still argue is/was/would be unfair), then why does Venus always have to be lumped into the generalization? It's not just unfair; it's blatantly untrue.

Okay, so the letter was even more hypocritical than originally thought. She is still saying that she was probably wrong.

And lumping Serena and Venus together is something that a high percentage of the tennis world does, not a single unforgivable act by one person.

To each his own, I guess, but I can imagine a scenario where a TATer might come across this before you and excitedly post it as a victory.

[Oberjej]

Okay, so the letter was even more hypocritical than originally thought. She is still saying that she was probably wrong.

And lumping Serena and Venus together is something that a high percentage of the tennis world does, not a single unforgivable act by one person.

To each his own, I guess, but I can imagine a scenario where a TATer might come across this before you and excitedly post it as a victory.

Well, I don't think she's saying she was wrong about the Open Letter, per se. If she feels that way, then she should write another one saying, "Damn, I'm human, and I was wrong." Because that letter caused a lot of angst. But as someone who is widely respected and in a position of influence, then Evert should have handled it different. I always wondered what would be so awful about a private phone call to Serena to express her concerns. If you really care, that's what you'd do. But she went public with it... For some reason unknown to me.

As for the lumping, I'm pretty vocal about that whenever I see it. Not just this situation. This was just the latest in about 5,694,105 installments.

Not following your last paragraph... Run that by me again? And try using small words, cause it's late, and after this day, I've only got about 3 functioning brain cells.

[georgshult]

Not following your last paragraph... Run that by me again? And try using small words, cause it's late, and after this day, I've only got about 3 functioning brain cells.

Saying, "Look everyone! Evert admits that having outside interests could be a good thing! She's basically negating a lot of what she said in her letter to Serena!"

[georgshult]

Saying, "Look everyone! Evert admits that having outside interests could be a good thing! She's basically negating a lot of what she said in her letter to Serena!"

Hip hip hoorah, and so on and so forth...

[georgshult]

Well, I don't think she's saying she was wrong about the Open Letter, per se. If she feels that way, then she should write another one saying, "Damn, I'm human, and I was wrong." Because that letter caused a lot of angst. But as someone who is widely respected and in a position of influence, then Evert should have handled it different. I always wondered what would be so awful about a private phone call to Serena to express her concerns. If you really care, that's what you'd do. But she went public with it... For some reason unknown to me.

Well I'm certainly not trying to defend her letter. And she wasn't saying "OMG, I've seen the light. Please forgive me." But I think "Hmm, maybe Serena and Venus had the right idea all along" is a good step, whether Venus should be in the sentence or not.

[Oberjej]

Saying, "Look everyone! Evert admits that having outside interests could be a good thing! She's basically negating a lot of what she said in her letter to Serena!"

Ah. And in part, perhaps that's what she's saying. I don't think that's what she's saying, but if that's the case, in my mind, she owes Serena, and Serena's fans, a fairly well-worded, yet slobberishly gushing apology.

[georgshult]

Ah. And in part, perhaps that's what she's saying. I don't think that's what she's saying, but if that's the case, in my mind, she owes Serena, and Serena's fans, a fairly well-worded, yet gushingly slobberish apology.

Well I'm certainly not trying to defend her letter. And she wasn't saying "OMG, I've seen the light. Please forgive me." But I think "Hmm, maybe Serena and Venus had the right idea all along" is a good step, whether Venus should be in the sentence or not.

Baby steps. Something is better than nothing.

[Oberjej]

Baby steps. Something is better than nothing.

Seeing as the woman spends little time "between husbands" but is often "interviewing new husband prospects", it shouldn't be a major shocker that she might have trouble choosing her words.

I suppose, Charlie.

[georgshult]

Seeing as the woman spends little time "between husbands" but is often "interviewing new husband prospects", it shouldn't be a major shocker that she might have trouble choosing her words.

I suppose, Charlie.

[avaiptutt]

I have nothing much to say because I never thought the first letter was that terrible. I'll leave it at that (other than to echo that people do need leave Venus out of discussion of Serena).

[Veveseinlep]

I haven't read the entire article, but from I've read here, Chris isn't saying she (Chris) was wrong. Chris isn't apologizing.

Chris is being hypocritical and voicing opinions that go directly against things she said in the past.

I thought her original "Open Letter" was a highly negative piece written by someone who should pay as much attention to her own personal life as she does to others'.

[Oberjej]

I haven't read the entire article, but from I've read here, Chris isn't saying she (Chris) was wrong. Chris isn't apologizing.

Chris is being hypocritical and voicing opinions that go directly against things she said in the past.

I thought her original "Open Letter" was a highly negative piece written by someone who should pay as much attention to her own personal life as she does to others'.

When you get past the first four or so paragraphs, it's a fairly nice piece written by Chrissie's trusty ghostwriter/Tennis Magazine intern. For Henin fans, by and large, it should be a fairly nice read about her career, her talent, what she brought to the game, and how she's missed... Though it does touch on some of the lower points, too... But that's, well, what it was, and it can't be changed. Still, all in all, a nice piece after you get through the introductory hypocritical nonsense.

[Oberjej]

I have nothing much to say because I never thought the first letter was that terrible. I'll leave it at that (other than to echo that people do need leave Venus out of discussion of Serena).

What do you know? You like Kiefer!

[avaiptutt]

I haven't read the entire article, but from I've read here, Chris isn't saying she (Chris) was wrong. Chris isn't apologizing.

Chris is being hypocritical and voicing opinions that go directly against things she said in the past.

I thought her original "Open Letter" was a highly negative piece written by someone who should pay as much attention to her own personal life as she does to others'.

We don't know anything about her personal life. We only know of her public life. We only think she (or she and Greg Norman) are at fault for the breakups of their marriages. We have painted a picture that the other two spouses are angels. But, we don't know that or enough to say "she should pay attention to her personal life." It's not like she's on drugs and going to rehab every other day. With a tiny portion of the story, who are we to judge?

The only problem I had with the first piece was Evert's motives. But, as written, she said everything I was thinking. And before I hear how others were adrift in their mid-20's and made those around them unhappy by making choices that were not popular or expected, don't think your story is something unique. Some of us are just not as open about stuff like that on a tennis board. And I separate my life from a multimillionaire athlete who showed up at events for over 1 1/2 years 30 pounds overweight and huffing and puffing across my screen.

And as far as hypocrisy, all of us, and I mean all of us, have been hypocritical on this board, including me. I try desperately to be consistent. But, I know I have crossed the line several times (maybe even in this very post ). We may not have as big a platform as Evert, but we do it, so who are we to judge.

Rant over.

[georgshult]

I haven't read the entire article, but from I've read here, Chris isn't saying she (Chris) was wrong. Chris isn't apologizing.

Chris is being hypocritical and voicing opinions that go directly against things she said in the past.

I don't think she was apologizing. But isn't saying "Maybe x,y and z is correct" when you had earlier said something different at least similar to saying you were wrong, or at least on that path?

If I were to say "Gosh, maybe Andy Roddick IS a wonderful guy. Maybe he'll become my favorite tennis player," I don't think I would be a hypocrite. I would be changing my opinion.

I suppose it's all in the way you hear her voice, though. Since some of us see her as an evil skank, it would be hard for those people to read anything she writes in a different way.

I see it differently (yay, differences!), but like Shtexas, I never really had a problem with the open letter.