U.S. Open Notebook : Seasoned Campaigner Doing His Talking on Tennis Players’ Behalf

NEW YORK —  As Hamilton Jordan stood in front of the international media here Tuesday, even invoking the name of Republican vice presidential candidate Dan Quayle, he spoke about things such as stepping forward and facing the truth.

In a most unlikely setting, a parking lot outside the National Tennis Center in Flushing Meadow, Jordan was campaigning once again, but not for Jimmy Carter or any other politician.

Instead, Jordan, the executive director of the players’ union, the Assn. of Tennis Professionals used this opportunity to discuss in-fighting for control of men’s professional tennis.

Just as Jordan began to talk, a helicopter buzzed over this curious gathering, which included, besides the reporters, ATP officials and players Mats Wilander, Tim Mayotte, Yannick Noah and Brad Gilbert. “That’s the USTA,” said Jordan, who was Carter’s chief of staff at the White House from 1977-81.

The U.S. Tennis Assn., which runs the U.S. Open, wouldn’t let the ATP hold the press conference at the National Tennis Center because it said it was against standard operating procedure. So, the parking lot became a suitable substitute.

Saturday, the union threatened to pull away from the governing body of men’s tennis, the Men’s Tennis Council in 1990 and start its own tour unless the council was restructured to give the players more control. Then, Monday, the first day of the Open, the International Tennis Federation, which runs the Grand Slam events as well as the Olympics and international team events, rejected the players’ plan.

Jordan said Tuesday: “The most important issue is having a voice in the sport which is consistent with the contribution that we make to the game. We don’t pretend to have all the answers. But I don’t know of a single major sport, a major sport in the world, where the players have less to say than they do in professional tennis.”

What makes this particular issue so potentially explosive is that, for once, the top players are behind the movement. Mayotte said that eight of the top 10 players met earlier and all were behind the move to restructure or start a new tour in 1990. Also, according to ATP board member and MTC representative Ray Moore, the rank and file are firmly behind the union. Moore wouldn’t give a number of exactly how many have pledged support, in writing.

“It is over 75, way more than that,” he said. “I don’t want to say how many players have actually signed. Because we haven’t had a chance to ask everyone. . . . But everyone who has been asked to sign has signed.”

The ATP said it would like to model, in part, men’s tennis after the PGA Tour. That group runs all aspects of the men’s golf tour, including marketing. However, there are several differences between the two, the foremost being that tennis is much more of an international sport than golf.

“(Change) has been coming for a long time,” said Charlie Pasarell, a former tour player, a tournament promoter and a member of the MTC. “The tournaments are frustrated, too. A lot of events are not getting the kind of fields they should be getting with the kind of money they’re putting up. There is no question in my mind that there is going to be some major change in tennis.”

Although 1990 is two years away, Wilander was asked whether the players had faced the possibility of being withheld from playing the Grand Slam events because of a potential split.

“If that’s what we have to do at the time, that’s what we have to do,” he said. “All I know is that I’ve played in a lot of matches this year and I’ve only played three of the top four players in the world.”

Mayotte, too, thinks there are too many tournaments in too many places, diluting the strength of the game. “There has to be more discussion on how many tournaments are a proper amount,” he said.

Jordan, seeing his opening for a spot on the evening news, delivered a one-liner, saying: “You answered that question better than Dan Quayle.”

Here, though, mixing politics wasn’t really out of the ordinary. Politics and tennis? Many feel the way this game is going these days, there’s no difference.

John McEnroe, in the midst of his own comeback, wasn’t at the press conference in the parking lot because he was getting ready for his first-round match. Nevertheless, McEnroe, a 6-3, 6-4, 6-4 winner over Mexico’s Leonardo Lavalle, had plenty to say about the ATP-ITF feud--and everything else.

--On the ATP-ITF conflict: “I think the central issue is improving the sport. I don’t think money is an issue. I think the players want to have more influence, and I think they deserve it. I hope we get the chance to do it. We need more of a foothold in the game.”

--On the suggestion the men’s game should follow the structure of women’s tour: “Give me a break, don’t make me sick.”

--On playing Australian Mark Woodforde, who beat McEnroe recently, here in the second round: “He played a great match against me a couple of weeks back. My problem was that he looked too much like (Rod) Laver to me. Next time, I’ll have to look at him, not like Laver, like Mark Woodforde.”

--On how the players feel about his comeback: “They’re welcoming it because they’re beating me more now. They won’t welcome it so much if I start beating their behinds.”

--On how the players respond to American Andre Agassi, the No. 4-ranked player in the world: “I’m not sure what their attitude toward Agassi is right now because they’re still in a state of shock over what he’s done. The attitude won’t be as friendly one year from now because of the stuff he pulls on the court and being as good as he is. People are going to feel like they’re being made fun of, on top of getting their butts kicked.

“It’s not like what happened to me. It seems like the players like to get stabbed in the back more than they like to get it in the front. That’s why they feel better toward Agassi than they did toward me. They can’t figure out what to be angry about with Agassi, yet.”