Wallace on Tennis

You know that David Foster Wallace knows something about tennis when, in his article about Roger Federer, he credits whom with being the father of modern day power tennis?

Bjorn Borg? Jimmy Connors? No, Ivan Lendl.

If you've never followed tennis, you may not be aware of the Czech player who, for many years, seemed like the Darth Vader of tennis. Tennis has produced its share of striking women players, and I mean their appearance, in addition to their quality of tennis. The 70s didn't exactly produce male studs.

Connors and Borg, who were the top players of their day, were considered reasonably good looking for their time. Connors wore his long hair over his ears, much like the Beatles. Borg wore his hair even longer. And it seemed, unlike Agassi, something Borg preferred to do, rather than a stunt to promote an image.

Lendl, on the other hand, was Eastern European, with dark hair, sunken eyes, and for a while, crooked teeth. Early in his career, he had a nasty habit of spitting all the time. Over time, he stopped spitting, his teeth got straightened, but many still considered him ugly, and as many people liked players like Kournikova for their beauty, they disliked Lendl for his lack thereof.

Furthermore, as Lendl sought to be number one, he saw how McEnroe would argue with the chair umpire and realized that he, too, needed to argue, even as it made McEnroe unpopular, and it didn't help Lendl either. McEnroe was perhaps the premier serve and volleyer of his day. He would charge the net, but early in his career, Lendl showed the kind of blistering power that marked his game. Lendl wasn't above pegging a player on the passing shot, a legal shot that makes it difficult to volley, but considered, in polite company, in poor taste. Lendl would learn to remove that shot from his game.

There were several keys to Lendl's game that lead to its influence over the modern game. His huge forehand was number one. Lendl frequently hit his shot down the line and frequently ran around his backhand to hit inside out. To do this, Lendl would move left. But instead of striking the ball with his backhand, he would continue to move left, then hit the shot with his forehand, but with the same target as his backhand, that is, to his opponent's backhand (assuming his opponent was a righty).

He ran around the backhand because he had a powerful forehand.

Much like Babe Ruth may have hit so many home runs because he tried, Lendl went for winners, because he could. Although bigger racquets have been blamed for causing the increase in power, Lendl actually used quite a small racquet, at 72 square inches. Had racquets been limited in size to about 80 square inches, Lendl still would have had his power game.

The revolution that marked the advent of power tennis may have had more to do with graphite racquets than oversized racquets. Sampras and Edberg used a racquet at 85 square inches, a significantly larger size than the 72 that Lendl used (the old timey racquets were 66 square inches, so Lendl used something only a touch bigger).

Power tennis was going to come whether or not the large racquet did. Case in point. Jimmy Arias. Few people remember Jimmy Arias because his career was so short. Jimmy Arias used the same racquet as Borg, the Borg Pro, which was a classically sized racquet. He had a huge forehand, but an awkward backhand. Ultimately, his diminuitive size hurt him.

Although Lendl epitomized power tennis, it's likely that it would have come anyway. Lendl's began playing his brand of power tennis starting around 1979. He would begin to play superlative tennis around 1982, when he beat McEnroe seven times in a row. Lendl would hit winners off the ground.

Connors hit hard, but his goal was like the classic Aussies. Get to net, and cut the point off. Borg was a steady baseliner willing to run down shots all day long.

Mind you, Lendl didn't hit with flurries of winners like modern day Federer or Nadal. He was raised on European clay, and could rally from the backcourt with the best of them. Like Borg or Wilander, Lendl could and would rally 20-30 shots. But as he improved, he learned to go for winners. He showed it was possible to do this, and it changed the way tennis was played.

It took a while for women to get to that level. For women, the player that made the huge breakthrough was Steffi Graf. Martina rushed the net, and her serves kept opponents off balance. She'd win quick matches because they couldn't pass her. But Graf would overpower her opponents from the baseline. Her biggest nemesis would come in one Monica Seles. Where Graf had a huge forehand, her backhand was an accurate slice, but one she rarely hit winners off of. Strong enough that it was hard to attack her backhand, it was not strong enough to win outright points.

Monica Seles, on the other hand, hit two hands on both sides, and so she didn't have real weaknesses except her speed. Graf was simply a much quicker player than Seles.

It wasn't long after Lendl began showing how power tennis would be played that a series of other players joined in. In the early days, they would have been Boris Becker, then Andre Agassi and Pete Sampras. The Bolletieri bunch were actually power hitters that included Jimmy Arias, Aaron Krickstein, before Agassi broke through. Even Ecuadorian, Andres Gomez, was a formidable power hitter with a huge lefty hook.

Really, in those days, you could play a game that was more Borg-like or more classic. Edberg played a classic serve and volley game, becoming the most elegant and precise volleyer of his day, an oddity among Swedes, who preferred to hit from the backcourt. His huge kick serve became a model for others to follow, and while his serve eventually became a liability as others managed to serve harder and harder, Edberg played good tennis for over 10 years, basically from 1983 to 1993.

Wilander was really a throwback. He lacked the power of Lendl, but was quick enough to run down Lendl's shots, and was consistent enough to give Lendl fits. Lendl may have hit winners from the baseline, but not tremendously often. Wilander had his best year in 1988, but then his decline was huge in 1989. Somehow, he managed to stay in the game even through 1994. He was Borg with a lot more variety and thinking.

By the time 1990 rolled around, players like Sampras and Agassi were redefining the game once again, going for even more winners, until you get to 2002 when Federer, then Nadal started their rise. Gone were the days when top players could have weak groundstrokes but big serves and volleys. A player like Roddick, with a huge serve, should be a great serve and volleyer, yet, his game is played from the back, like many of his contemporaries.

It's amazing a top serve and volleyer like Federer can't actually play serve and volley, so he must resort to playing off the ground. He's perhaps the most accomplished serve and volleyer to rarely play that style anymore, partly because passers are so good that he can't do it, partly because he's fantastic off the ground as well.

David Foster Wallace understood a lot of the history of tennis especially tennis in the 1980s and onwards. I grew up watching tennis and would agree with his assessment of tennis. Of course, he used far more eloquent words in his summary of tennis, but he had the tennis acumen to point it out.