Hewitt's court battle to hot up
By Penelope Debelle
Adelaide
August 15, 2003


Troubled tennis ace Lleyton Hewitt will go to court for a bitter battle with the men's governing body, the Association of Tennis Professionals, only days after the final of the US Open.

While Hewitt, 22, this week continued his fall from grace by losing in the first round of the Cincinnati Masters, meaning his world ranking of No. 6 is likely to slide further, his $2.5 million legal action against the ATP has gained pace.

Documents filed in the South Australian Supreme Court by the ATP describe Hewitt's claim that he was defamed by the ATP as "in many respects embarrassing" and want itstruck out.

The ATP's response to Hewitt's legal attack has brought the role of Hewitt's father, Glynn Hewitt, into focus. Documents filed in Adelaide claim Glynn Hewitt threatened his son would deliver the ATP "the biggest sledging ever" if it forced him to do an interview with the American TV network ESPN before last year's Cincinnati Masters - in which Hewitt progressed through to the final.


In the same tournament this week, Hewitt was defeated in the first round by an unseeded Belgian Xavier Malisse.

Glynn Hewitt, who with wife Cherilyn often accompanies Hewitt on the professional tennis circuit, was acting on Lleyton's behalf, the ATP alleged, when he told an ATP official last August that Lleyton would do the ESPN interview, "but only for five minutes and that (the ATP) should be prepared for the biggest sledging ever".

Hewitt, who did not do the interview demanded by the ATP as part of his official obligations, said in a post-match interview that the interview request was "crap", according to the documents. The ATP contends other senior players including Pete Sampras, Andre Agassi, Roger Federer, Marat Safin and Tommy Haas did their interviews without incident.

Glynn Hewitt later that month again intervened in Lleyton's fight with the ATP, telling them in a letter Lleyton "would never accept any fine or finding that (he) had committed any violation of the rules".

Lleyton Hewitt took the defamation action alleging damage to his reputation based on media statements issued by the ATP after it fined Hewitt for missing the interview with the host network.

Hewitt appealed and had asked for the appeal panel to include former players Ivan Lendl, John McEnroe and Mats Wilander but the ATP instead appointed Czech player Jakob Hlasek and US doubles champion Richey Renenberg.

Hewitt had arranged to take part in the appeal hearing by telephone conference, according to the ATP, but did not do so, telling the panel through his counsel he was unavailable.

The case has not been listed but is expected to be first heard before a Supreme Court judge in the week after the US Open, which finishes on September 7.

Lleyton may yet give his critics a backhander
By Malcolm Knox
June 28 2003
Sydney Morning Herald

Five or six years ago, one of those sultana-textured sages from the international tennis circuit prophesied Lleyton Hewitt's career. At that stage, Hewitt was a pimply adolescent who'd won a tournament in Adelaide.

"He'll make top 10," said the sage, "and then he'll be finished by 21." How come? "His game is built entirely around his speed. He's the fastest kid I've ever seen.

"He's highly motivated, so he doesn't make many mistakes, but his main thing is his speed. And that will begin to go by his early 20s, and when it goes, he's going to have to find something else."

After his poor form at Roland Garros, Queens and Wimbledon, there are two theories on Hewitt. One is that he's just lost some matches. The other is that he's on the slide because of his parents, coaches, lawsuits or all of the above.

These theories seem to mistake cause for consequence. What came first was his losing that 1 per cent of speed and motivation. The off-court stuff, if there is tension, is more likely a result of losing matches.

Then again, the sage (well, to be precise, tennis bum) might be wrong. Hewitt exceeded his forecast, making No. 1, winning grand slams at Wimbledon and Flushing Meadow, and not hitting a rough patch until he was 23 [sic: he's just 22!]. He may yet come back. But even if he retired today, he'd still be the best-performed Australian tennis player since Evonne Goolagong-Cawley.

Maybe, as it always seems with tennis players, his personality will emerge, and he'll be appreciated, on his way down.


How athletes can be thrown off course by the excesses of the sporting parent

By Kieren Perkins
June 28 2003
Sydney Morning Herald

In recent weeks the calls for Lleyton Hewitt's parents to let him control his own destiny have grown louder.

And it is no wonder, given his change of coach, closely followed by a disastrous Wimbledon defence, that these events have been attributed to his parents. But is it all their fault?

Parents of athletes are notorious for holding on to their successful children far longer than the average parent could tolerate. Having come through swimming, where athletes are representing Australia as teenagers, I understand why this happens.

The pressure on athletes to perform is huge - training hours alone would make most mere mortals flounder. But with the expectations of sponsors, media, sporting organisations, governments, charities and fans, an athlete's time and focus are at a premium. For young athletes this can be almost intolerable, except for one shelter - parents.

Elite athletes often see parents as the only people they can trust, the only people who will allow them to be single-minded towards success by taking care of all worries outside sport.

Once success comes, the line of sharks waiting to get a piece of you is long, and your parents shield you from them and make sure that the right thing is being done for you.

Of course the scenario may not stay this simple. Everyone's attitude eventually gets skewed by the trappings of success, and while I refuse to believe that any parent would maliciously do the wrong thing by their child, wanting to hold on for as long as possible can cause the best of us to make skewed decisions.

Parents may warn their child: "Only I know what's best for you. Everyone else is trying to manipulate you." Some of this may be true, but there's one thing missing - the realisation that everyone grows up, and eventually only we know what is best for ourselves.

The emotional stranglehold can make it very hard for any child to part with their parents. When international success and vast sums of money are concerned, it is even harder.

One saving grace should be the coach/athlete relationship, a relationship that should be sacred. I was lucky in my career because my parents were careful in choosing my coach, John Carew. And when the decision was made, they stepped back and let him coach.

Naturally, they made sure things were going well while I was young but when I became an adult, the swimming was left up to Mr Carew and me. They always worried for their son but knew, or maybe hoped, that they had done their job in raising me. The rest was my responsibility. And a happy athlete is a successful one.

The coach should always be in charge of an athlete's preparation. It's their job to make sure everything is working towards a long-term plan and the athlete is giving all that is required to achieve their goals. If a third party has a say then failure is assured, because an athlete who doesn't trust his or her coach second-guesses decisions and mistakes are made.

I often get asked by parents, "little Johnny is the under-8 champion, what can we do to make sure he becomes the champion we know he can be?". This raises my "pushy parent alert". Even at such a young age, there is so much emphasis placed on winning, not enjoyment.

When I was little I swam because I enjoyed it, not to win. I'm amazed by the attitude of some parents and kids involved in the under-6 soccer competition my daughter plays in. Not only is winning everything, but some of the teams she's played against have five-year-olds who heckle the losing side. It's no surprise children drop out of sport.

As a general rule, parents who push their children to become champions are setting them up for failure. It is unfortunate that because some of the most famous athletes in the world are child prodigies, there's a perception that early focus on excellence is how you produce a champion.

One story that did scare me was the parenting style of Earl Woods. When Tiger first started to win, the reports of his childhood were troubling - hitting hundreds of balls from the age of two, being told he was going to become the greatest golfer ever, and being expected to improve his and his family's life. That's mammoth pressure for any young person, and an example that shouldn't be promoted as the right way to make a champion.

Recently, it appears Earl has backed off and allowed his son to be the champion he is in his own way. I like to believe Earl was smart enough to realise there was nothing more he could do for his son, other than support him when he needs it.

All athletes are human, and trouble off the field has a huge effect. Focus is lost, self-belief wavers, and failure will continue.


------------------------------------------------------------------------------


It's team Hewitt versus the world when a form slump is under scrutiny

By Richard Hinds in London
June 28 2003
Sydney Morning Herald

It seems at times as if Lleyton Hewitt and his close circle of family and friends think the whole world is against them. This week they were back in the bunker as a substantial, and very well-credentialled, proportion of the tennis-playing world lined up to take pot shots.

That was only part of the tumultuous, and achingly predictable, response to what was, in the context that is so often lacking in the world of professional sport, really only a tennis match.

Of course for Hewitt it was much more than that. Walking out to play the first match on centre court as defending champion should have been one of the greatest moments of his career. Instead, defeat by world No. 203 Ivo Karlovic provided Hewitt's personal lowlight.

It seemed perfectly obvious to those who have viewed Hewitt's lacklustre lead-up to the tournament, watched with concern his sudden split with coach Jason Stoltenberg and furrowed their brows at the timing of his law suit against the ATP, the body that runs men's tournaments outside the grand slams, that all was not well with Hewitt.

But even for some of the game's top names, that deduction was the result only of their technical analysis of Hewitt's technique, some locker-room scuttlebutt or just informed guesswork. Few outside - and even a few of those inside - Hewitt's tightknit bunch are given much insight into what ails the former world No.1.

Hewitt's aversion to some elements of the Australian media is well known.

The only comments from his camp are filtered through those journalists considered to be "positive" in their outlook. Pronouncements about the reasons for Stoltenberg's departure - officially, so he could spend more time with his family - or Glynn Hewitt's reaction to the criticism of he and his wife Cherilyn's close involvement with their son's career are handed down as virtual press releases.

His management group Octagon is not about to risk putting its star client off-side by entering the debate.

"It doesn't seem like anyone wants to take a positive attitude about it right now," said Kelly Wulf of Octagon. "We're just not going to respond."

When Glynn Hewitt did respond, it was in anger about criticism of his own role rather than his son's form slump.

"It says a lot about the fickle nature and jealousy of some people," Glynn Hewitt told Adelaide's The Advertiser. "It's at times like these when you find out who your true friends are."

That seemed typical of an attitude highlighted by Simon Barnes in The Times, who wrote that Hewitt had taken on the world "and was suddenly surprised to find himself outnumbered". Of course, when a top player struggles there are plenty of former players willing to take a well-paid swing in a newspaper column.

Even before the tournament, Pat Cash had written what many suspected, that there was more to Stoltenberg's departure from the Hewitt entourage than met the eye. "Clearly it was hard for Stoltenberg to balance life on the road with being a family man with two young children, but there is probably more to it, even though neither party is saying anything," wrote Cash.

Boris Becker joined Australia's former Wimbledon champion Ashley Cooper in wondering if Hewitt's parents should be following their son around the globe. Becker wrote about "certain people around him who are making life a lot more difficult for Hewitt than it should be."

"I see that his parents are with him almost all the time," said Becker. " In which other sport would a 22-year-old No.1 have his parents travelling with him?"

But perhaps the most telling remark came from John Newcombe, who reluctantly told the Herald that he was concerned about the timing of the law suit, in which Hewitt has alleged that the ATP attempted to trick him into signing a document that would have put him in breach of the sport's drug code.

"That can't help," said Newcombe of the timing of the law suit. "You are with someone for 18 months and change two weeks before Wimbledon. But there is probably too much happening around him. When you see a young athlete in any sport with a lot of things happening around them, it is generally not that conducive to playing well."

Coming from Newcombe, the words carry weight. The former Davis Cup captain has long been a vocal supporter and, after Hewitt's occasional indiscretions, stout defender of the young Australian.

Hewitt will stay at Wimbledon as long as his girlfriend, Kim Clijsters, keeps winning. He is not expected to play again until a tournament in Los Angeles starting on July 28. Before then, perhaps he will take Becker's advice and go lie on a beach and get himself together. More likely, the Hewitt camp will scour the reviews of his disappointing Wimbledon performance and plot their revenge on the world.


------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Sat, Jun 28, 2003
The Border Mail

Size does matter on sports field


LLEYTON Hewitt looked like a toddler shaking the hand of a giant at Wimbledon this week.

Since being whipped by the 208cm-tall Croat Ivo Karlovic there have been many stories about how Hewitts life is falling apart now that hes lost a tennis match. One story that was a variation on the themes of parents, girlfriend and motivation, was a theory on how small Hewitt is and therefore he might be the next Michael Chang struggling to win against the bigger, stronger players.

But Hewitt, though slight of frame, is certainly no midget.

He is 180cm tall, or 5 feet 11 inches in the old measure.

He is not a colossus, but at that height walking down the street he would not give the impression of being a displaced pygmy with bleached hair.

And look at the man who many believe might win Wimbledon, Andre Agassi.

He is hardly a towering presence yet with wins in all grand slam tournaments he is one of the all-time greats.

But there is no doubt that as he steps up to the baseline to send down a 200kmh-plus serve, Karlovics stature would provide him with a different view over the net to that seen through Hewitts eyes.

Does it give him an unfair advantage though? Is the level playing field becoming less level when someone more than 2m tall faces off against someone almost 30cm shorter.

Boxing is one of few sports that recognises the advantages of different physiques through its weight division system.

But that would be unsuited to tennis.

With humans, at least in developed countries, getting significantly bigger with the arrival of each generation, could it be that the dimensions of our sporting arenas, fields and courts should change commensurately?

If tennis comes to be a game dominated by single physical type, in the way basketball is, will it be time to consider enlarging the court?

Is tennis, long considered a sport where finesse and reflexes are as important |as power, the kind of |sport where one physical type should have an advantage?

Basketballers will object Im sure to the suggestion that theirs is a sport for tall people. But at the top level, with few exceptions, it is. If there was a basketballer representing his country at the Olympics as tall as Hewitt hed be considered a freak of nature.

While sporting outcomes will always be decided by a combination of ability and physical advantage, could it be that the pendulum could swing more towards outcomes being decided on physical attributes like height?

Surely competitors would want to win a sporting contest because they were better, rather than bigger.

Thats not to say strength and height as sporting attributes should be dismissed. There are sports dedicated to testing those combinations such as high jump, shot put and the hammer throw.

Australian Rules footballers are getting taller and, on the whole, heavier, but still there appears to be plenty of space on the paddock for them and they can still accommodate a diversity of player sizes.

Tony Liberatore is a modern era player who would have thought that being six-foot tall was equivalent to high-altitude training.

Hawthorn captain Shane Crawford is another who would be able to stare his opponents in the chin.

Crawford is able to dominate matches and lack of height does not appear to be an obstacle when it comes to bringing down a contested mark.

Maybe the small players will just have to find a way around the big brutes on the other side of the net.

Maybe sport its rules and its playing arenas should not be tampered with. Contestants will have to learn to get around the opposition with whatever advantage genetics, dedication and coaching can give them.

But in other walks of life it is time to start taking into account we humans are getting bigger and heavier.

Im certain most people would love to have bigger seats to sit down on in trains, planes, buses and in cinemas.

Glynn Hewitt has accused critics of his son Lleyton, of being jealous and fickle. Angry criticism of the reigning Wimbledon champion’s shock first round loss, he claimed Lleyton was not getting ‘a fair shake’.
“It says a lot about the fickle nature and jealousy of some people. It’s at times like these when you find out who your true friends are” Mr. Hewitt said.
In a wide-ranging interview with The Advertiser, Mr Hewitt also:
DENIED he and his wife Cherilyn exerted too much influence on the former world No. 1.
CLAIMED there was nothing sinister in the departure of former coaches Darren Cahill and Jason Stoltenberg.
Mr. Hewitt specifically pointed the finger at 1958 Wimbledon winner Ashley Cooper who has suggested Lleyton’s parents should spend less time on tour with him so he can “become his own man”. “I think it’s too much of a pressure cooker” the Queenslander said following Hewitt’s defeat at the hands of unknown Croat Ivo Karlovic on Monday.
Mr. Hewitt hit back, saying Cooper was out of touch.
“How Ashley Cooper, who I’ve met once and Lleyton’s met once, can make a comment bout what family situation should or should not be is beyond me,” he said.
“Cooper is a guy from a bygone era in terms of commitment, professionalism and the level of players involved.
“We’re on tour – and not as much as most people think – because LLEYTON WANTS US HERE AS HIS SUPPORT. Lleyton is financially independent and mature enough not to have us here if that’s what he chooses.
Cherylin and I are part of his support group. If he wasn’t a tennis player and living permanently in Adelaide as a 22 year old going to University or working 9-5, he would probably still be living in our family environment.
“Is there something wrong with that?”
Mr. Hewitt acts as financial adviser to his son, having had a long career in the business world. Mrs Hewitt, a physical education teacher, advises on diet and fitness. Mr Hewitt said the couple did not travel to every tournament. “ It’s simply not true to say we’re at tournaments all of the time,” he said. “We tend to build our travel around the slams. Lleyton leaves the financial side of the business to me and the busiest time for that is around the Slams. I manage most of his deals through (management company) Octagon and it’s something Lleyton doesn’t need to be distracted with. We’re a support base for him and we’ve also got a daughter (Jaslyn) on the tour, who we also support”
Mr. Hewitt said he and his wife found it strange there was no criticism of their presence when their son won Wimbledon last year. “Why it becomes an issue now is beyond me” he said. “To Lleyton, he’s lost a tennis match at an important tournament – and it hurts him to lose, but by the same token, this experience has enabled him to learn whose support he can appreciate and those who are fickle”.
Mr. Hewitt said his son used the Internet to read reports of his matches and “is of the opinion that he never gets a fair shake”…… “If he goes out on court and is effervescent and boisterous he gets bagged,” he said …..”If he goes out there and is not effervescent and boisterous he gets bagged”…….. “So how can he win?”
Mr. Hewitt said his son had been deeply hurt over reports surrounding his parting from former coach Darren Cahill…….. “We copped all this flak when Darren resigned and all this stuff about ‘How did you let Darren go, he got you to No. 1?”… Mr. Hewitt said.
We hired Jason within 24 hours, obviously at short notice, and Lleyton becomes an even better player, wins Wimbledon and hangs on to the No. 1 ranking for 18 months….. all of a sudden, he has a loss at Wimbledon and he’s not the player he was!.”
Mr. Hewitt said the family first been subjected to jealousy when Lleyton was only 8 years old and playing in an event in Canberra….” We went to the event and we started hearing these stories coming from interstate about Lleyton.” He said….. “ I was accused of making him hit 1000 balls over the net before he could have dinner, it was absolute ‘Bullshit’, but we were questioned over it….. it was poison pen stuff and we’ve seen plenty of it since… Lleyton’s had to put up with it since he was a junior and he tends to ignore most of it. He doesn’t mind – and we don’t mind – valid criticism but there seems to be a lot of personal stuff coming from some people”
Mr. Hewitt said his son was not playing his best tennis, but was simply going through a flat spot…….Like most players…..”If anything this loss will make him an EVEN BETTER – STRONGER PLAYER.

Hewitt returns to the scene of his demise in an act of sheer devotion

By Richard Hinds in London
June 27 2003

To the women's draw at Wimbledon, an exciting new edition - he goes by the name of Lleyton Hewitt and his appearance in the centre court grandstand for girlfriend Kim Clijsters's match must be considered an act of devotion.

Not just because Hewitt has faced something of a media firestorm since his first round defeat and could have been forgiven for keeping a much lower profile. But also because, even for the most loyal partner, watching a second round women's match at a grand slam is above and beyond the call of duty.

Even the draw proved cruel to Hewitt. Originally, Clijsters had been scheduled to play on court two but the match was transferred to centre court, meaning he had to return to the scene of his inglorious defeat by Ivo Karlovic.

Hewitt watched the match with his cap pulled down over his eyes and a pensive expression on his face, pretty much the way he watches all Clijsters's matches. It was a suitable countenance with which to observe the Belgian's routinely one-sided and mostly uneventful 6-1, 6-3 victory over Frenchwoman Virginie Razzano.

All sorts of theories have abounded since Hewitt's defeat about the state of his game and even his state of mind. But, after her victory, Clijsters reassured reporters her boyfriend had taken defeat well.

"He's been fine," she said. "He's been playing football and everything and golf and stuff. Of course it's nice to have him there for the support. It's always nice to see him sitting in the box."

However, Clijsters was more reluctant to discuss the speculation about whether Hewitt should take some time out of the game or, perhaps, travel without his omnipresent parents.

"I think that's a question you have to ask him," she said. "I don't think that's anything for me to answer. I think if you want to ask him his private questions about his private life, I don't think it's any of your business either."

While Hewitt has now become part of Clijsters's entourage, he could take some comfort from the continued progress of his conqueror Karlovic - even if it did come at the expense of fellow South Australian Paul Baccanello.

In crushing 29 aces past Baccanello in his 6-4, 7-6 (7-3), 5-7, 6-2 victory, the Croat gave some credence to the theory expounded by many of Hewitt's loyal followers - that he had simply been outgunned by the 209-centimetre Croatian.

In just three days, Karlovic has attained folk hero status. Awed by his size and charmed by his brave battle with a speech impediment, reporters have been lining up to gather details of his life, including his sudden transfer from a £35 ($88) per night hotel to more salubrious surroundings.

"It was unbelievable because all the press was after me," said Karlovic of the reaction of his win over Hewitt. "I'm not used to it so it was a little bit hard for me. But it's OK."

Having played a doubles tournament with Karlovic, Baccanello knew what to expect.

"He served a lot of aces but it was the timing of his aces," said Baccanello. "On break points he just cleaned the lines. Too good. Absolutely in my opinion it was not a fluke on Monday. But it is going to be interesting to see how long he can maintain the level. Hopefully he does well, he's a good guy, he's a good player. And if he can maintain that level I tell you what, put your money on Ivo Karlovic to win the title mate."

Baccanello said it was Karlovic's confidence as much as his size that made him such a big threat. "He is stating he can get those serves in in a pressure situation and he can make those returns when he needs to and that's the difference."

Karlovic next plays the Belarusian Max Mirnyi. "He also have a strong serve and he play like me. I serve and volley. It's gunna be a tough match for sure. A lot of aces," the Croat said.

Karlovic said a new coach and some hard work on the practice court are the reasons for his sudden rise. But unlike Goran Ivanisevic, the last Croat to stun the crowds at Wimbledon, he does not have a good and a bad personality. "There is only a good Ivo Karlovic," he said.