By David Wiseman
January 28th 2009 @ 5:21am
Who classified Philippoussis as a legend?
Could the juxtaposition be any sharper? In the same tournament that Jelena Dokic has risen from obscurity to capture the hearts of a nation, the Scud is strutting his stuff with yesterday’s heroes.
It’s all a bit of a laugh and a giggle, which is fitting because that’s how he treated his career. He took all the amazing talent he had and frittered it away to be nothing but a footnote.
At the 1996 Australian Open, Scud had turned 19 and was taking on Pete Sampras who had won six of the 10 past Grand Slams. Scud made mincemeat of Sampras, knocking him out in straight sets.
In the manner which would typify Philippoussis’ career, in the next round he would lose in straight sets to Mark Woodforde.
Mark Woodforde!
The same guy Philippoussis would not lose to again in three more encounters. But that was Flip: do the amazing when it didn’t matter so much and fold when it really counted.
Notwithstanding, the world was still his oyster. But it just never happened.
He would go on to play in two Grand Slam finals, two Davis Cup winning teams, and that was about it. Nothing much else to show for his incredible talent.
Am I being harsh on him?
Probably, but it’s not like I’m going on about Simon Youl or Richard Fromberg. Philippoussis had the chops to be number one player in the world and win at least five grand slams.
Did he achieve 1/50th of his potential? Not even close.
If only he had the tenacity and determination of someone like Lleyton Hewitt. Hewitt’s doggedness in Scud’s body would have been an unstoppable force on the level of Roger Federer. But in the end what we got a guy who was more interested in being a party guy than a tennis player.
What Dokic is going through could have happened to Philippoussis.
He could have been playing on Rod Laver Arena, cutting a swathe through the tournament.
Instead, he is on an outside court goofing it off with Henri Leconte in the legends’ doubles. I’m not sure how this happened because who classified Philippoussis as a legend?
Like this content? Buzz it up!
Free Email updates:
Our daily emails are only sent if there is content for the sport or that author. You can subscribe to multiple daily emails; or get the daily Roar email with all our content in it. We value privacy. More...
(14)
Rabbitz said | January 28th 2009 @ 7:23am | Report comment
I don’t know about him ever being a “legend” but more to the point, I think this sums up what is wrong with Australian sports journalism and sports followers in general:-
“what we got a guy who was more interested in being a party guy than a tennis player. ”
Firstly, “What we got”? Frankly, what we want and what we perceive that we should get is pretty much irrelevant. It is not about us. I would say, looking at the lifestyle that the Scud seems to live, the HE is getting what HE wants.
Which leads me to the second half of the quote. So he wants to be a “party guy” who uses some of his tennis talent to fund his lifestyle. Why is that a crime? Just because he didn’t fulfil the ambitions that YOU hold for him doesn’t mean he hasn’t got what HE wants. I would love to be able to swan around the globe playing at being a “party guy” then play a few games of tennis to top up the bank account.
Just because someone has some talent, it doesn’t mean they have to take it to its fullest potential on behalf of a bunch or people they will never know, who really only care about something to watch on the TV. In having the choice to live life on your own terms is the best use of your talent.
The Cougar said | January 28th 2009 @ 7:55am | Report comment
Lleyton has won two grand slam titles. Scud has courted Anna Kournikova and Delta Goodrem. Who you think is the legend is a long and complex debate… or not…
Scrum Importance said | January 28th 2009 @ 8:09am | Report comment
Rabbitz, perfect repsonse.
The Poo is more of a legend than any of the others he may be playing against – Pure Talent is only one part of a tennis player, mental strength is a massive part and probably what The poo lacks – so did he ever really have all the ability people love to say he had.
He lives a lifestyle he chooses- no matter what your profession – if you can live a lifestyle you desire, I reckon you are a legend.
sheek said | January 28th 2009 @ 8:20am | Report comment
I’m with Cougar.
Phillipoussis is truly a great legend……….& it has nothing to do with tennis!!!!!
The rest of us are insanely jealous.
Brett McKay said | January 28th 2009 @ 9:45am | Report comment
I’ve just this month finished reading Pat Cash’s autobiography (it’s only taken me five years, an indication of the quality of read), and amongst a litany of outrageous claims and tales was Cash’s “honest” assessment that Philippoussis was twice the player Pat Rafter was, and light years ahead of Lleyton Hewitt, but unfortunately, never had anywhere near the desire of either. It was possibly Cash’s only valid point in the book…
But Rabbitz is right, he got out of tennis what he wanted, and for that we have to say good luck to him. Especially for the Kournikova success…
But David is also right – as is often the case, “legend” may still be being applied a little liberally…
Who Needs Melon said | January 28th 2009 @ 11:16am | Report comment
A strange one this:
– On a visceral level I agree with David.
– On a logical level I agree with Rabbitz
We don’t harp on about Chris Guccione not fulfilling his potential. But say he’d burst onto the scene and had a year or so of occaisonal glorious wins to start his career. Then dropped back to where he is now. Then right now we’d probably all be saying how disappointing he has been. Is this fair?
There have been many players who play unbelievably well for a period of time, who were slated to be the next big thing… and then drop away. Ferrero. Nalbandian. Gonzalez? Roddick? Then there’s Jo-Wilfried Tsonga and Marcos Baghdatis.
There are so many ingredients that go into making a fantastic player. If a player is missing one of the physical ingredients (height for instance), we wouldn’t criticise them for it. If they are lacking a mental ingredient (obsessiveness?) then we are all over them… despite the fact that we ourselves and 99.999% of the population also lack that trait.
Spanner said | January 28th 2009 @ 6:39pm | Report comment
When it counted Flip won for his country the Davis Cup off his own racquet. When the Aussie tennis gestapo were out for him he told them to shove it and watched them loose to Zimbabwe. He has achieved for his country (Rafter didnt) and the rest is individual choice. Who would want to spend just a little time with the company he has had. He never promised anybody anything, maybe those who think he owes them something should look in the mirror.
David Wiseman said | January 28th 2009 @ 8:17pm | Report comment
Rabbitz – What you write is good and well for today. But 15….20…30 years down the track, I think Scud will feel a tinge of regret that he didn’t play to his potential. He will look at a trophy cabinet that while full should have been bulging. As Terry Malloy says in On the Waterfront, “You don’t understand. I coulda had class. I coulda been a contender. I coulda been somebody, instead of a bum, which is what I am, let’s face it.” If you think I’m being harsh on him, the pages of history will even be harsher.
The Cougar – Fair enough, I suppose.
Scrum Importance – Why couldn’t he have both? Plenty of other players seemed to have combined the two.
sheek – This is a sports site thus we’re assessing his sporting abilities not his partying one. As a partier, he is world-class.
Brett McKay – Yes, we’re all right. Guess it depends if you see the glass half-full or half empty…
Who Needs Melon – Well said.
Spanner – I never said he owed us anything, just himself.
Rabbitz said | January 29th 2009 @ 6:18am | Report comment
David
I take your point, but once again, as a journalist, you are not doing your job. As a journalist you should be journaling things, i.e. reporting things that happen, not telling someone you probably do not know how they should live their life or how they will think in “15….20…30 years down the track”.
Granted The Roar is a sports opinion outfit, so expressing your opinion is fine, however, it seems that the default opinion is that sportsmen and sportswomen are beholden to the public in all aspects of their being, and that unless they give 110% they are worthless.
Will he regret the empty trophy case? I don’t know, but he might also look at his flash house, his garage full of expensive cars and the photo’s of his girlfriends and think “geez, I could have had a bunch of silver and gold trinkets and missed out on some of the fun – nah” – Could it be that a great life is also a great trophy?
Will history be harsh on him? I don’t think so as he really will be only a passing reference. A “whatever happened to?” subject.
Regards
The Cougar said | January 29th 2009 @ 7:44am | Report comment
Rabbitz,
David’s article is clearly an opinion piece, not a news story.
Rabbitz said | January 29th 2009 @ 9:37am | Report comment
Cougar,
I did say that in my reply.
So to simplify things, I cheerfully withdraw the comment regarding journalism.
Rabz
I thought I was a footy nut... said | January 29th 2009 @ 10:32am | Report comment
I just want to commend all the individuals that have commented on this story.
This site has only recently spiked my interest, however I’d just like to say how refreshing and satisfying it is to read dialogue from sports fans without it descending into bitchiness and expletives after the first five minutes.
Keep up the good work, and I believe you will win over many more sports fans with logical, constructive disagreement.
Thanks,
Blair
jen said | January 29th 2009 @ 3:40pm | Report comment
Firstly .. Wayne Arthurs, Wally Masur, John Fitzgerald, and a couple of other questionable “legends” are playing so Mark’s 2 slam finals, 2 Davis cup wins, 11 titles and world no.8 ranking seems to be more then enough for this hit-and-giggle event.
No doubt Mark has under-achieved… but how easily people dismiss the impact of his knee surgeries. Mark was in the top10 and in peak form and physical condition when he had his first knee surgery in 1999, he was 23yrs old. A year later he had another surgery after enduring unfair criticism from his davis cup team mates for pulling out of a tie with knee soreness after 2000 wimbledon. He had another operation on the same left knee in 2002 and also had that freak hyper-extension injury to the same knee during the US open in 2001. 2003 was the first year since 1999 he had a full year on the tour and he made the wimdledon final and top10 from starting the year ranked 80+
2004 – 2008 have been a mixture of distractions (women), poor fitness, multiple injuries (adductor tears, ankle ligaments and back strains) plus the 2 surgeries to his right knee within 12 months.
Give the majority of top players similar injuries between the age of 23-27 and their careers would probably similar. Look at Hewitt struggling now he’s had a couple of injury setbacks. It’s not a excuse for his lapses in commitment to the game – but it’s a pretty significant factor and he’s done ok to achieve what he has.
David Wiseman said | January 29th 2009 @ 4:32pm | Report comment
Rabbitz – You’re right in what you say. Really the main point I was trying to make was that what Jelena Dokic just experienced could have so easily happened to Scud.
I thought I was a footy nut – Thank you very much
Welcome to the site.
Jen – I agree with everything you’ve written. Well said.