Zverev’s win left a bad taste for many of us who follow tennis closely and are aware of his history with women. Maybe more deflating was that across three networks an all star cast of players were working this match including McEnroe, Courier, Agassi and Lindsay Davenport. Not one of them opined on his history. It was a huge fail and very disappointing.
Thank you Ben for continuing to do your coverage of AZ how you have done it for the French Open. I do certainly find it odd when watching on tv that it never seems to get mentioned and that AZ is just some big underdog story of the man who had these on court issues only with no mention to his off court issues at all.
As an Aussie, I'm proud of how Nina acted during the 2025 AO Men's Final Ceremony and wish there was similar scenes for AZ's French Open Ceremony.
There's a fantastic 2021 Reddit thread on Zverev with some really thoughtful comments, and I sent one of the Reddit comments (which I'm pasting below) to a tennis-fan friend who thinks Olya should have pressed charges to prevent Zverev from playing tennis again. (I noted to my friend that Brenda Patea DID press charges against him and was then put through the legal wringer by Germany's courts (seriously, Germany???) and Zverev's well-paid, likely-terrifying lawyers.)
The 2021 comment from Reddit, which I wish more of the tennis world commentators -- Davenport, McEnroe, etc -- would have thought about instead of just pretending none of this happened:
"A lot of people here have an obsession with the legal side of things and they lose sight of what is happening. Sometimes people are not seeking revenge. Sometimes people are not seeking justice. They just want to be heard. They want to get things off their chest. They don’t want to hide in their own secrets and trauma. Is it not possible Olya doesn’t want to go through thousands of dollars in legal fees? Months and months of investigations? Telling her story over and over again to multiple different people? Corroborating witnesses? Is she so wrong to just want to tell her story once and for all? With your own morality, be the judge of what you think happened. Decide which side you stand on or don’t. But Olya said what she had to say and so do Zverev and I choose to stand with her. My heart breaks for her and what she went through. It is hard enough to read and I can’t imagine living it."
Also, I'm not sure how popular Andy Roddick's Served podcast is at the moment but I was disappointed in how Andy was framing AZ's story & FO win on his podcast/s. He seemed to be very dismissive of AZ critics with no mention to off court issues at all. We heard about the diabetic issues but nothing about the off court issues. Just disappointed in Andy
I can't say it's surprising. It became obvious a couple months back that Roddick and Zverev have some form of collegial or friendly relationship because Roddick mentioned Zverev sought his advice about how to handle the Jannik Sinner match-up (which apparently gives him a massive amount of anxiety). Andy takes a very player-access/forward approach, much like the broadcasters, and probably wants the option to bring him on the podcast.
I remember the accusation being discussed during broadcast here in Quebec a while ago (probably during la Coupe Rogers). I am not sure if they mentioned it again last Sunday because I choose not to watch.
However I am really surprised by the reaction in France, especially L’Équipe’s choice not to put the RG winner à la une is huge. Today, the reaction to the interview and his refusal to discuss the accusation was everywhere. If he was hoping to silence people on this issue, this not working.
This is a very well-done and interesting compilation and analysis. Thanks for doing it. If anything, you’re being kind to television. You may hope, as you say, that the TV side can learn from this. But you surely know it won’t and doesn’t even want to. On U.S. broadcasts, interviews with Zverev (and all players) are obsequious, chummy affairs laced with “my man,” “what a gutsy performance” and “it was beautiful to see.” It’s not that TV is failing to, as Mary Carillo would say, “commit journalism.” It’s not even trying. Netflix’s “Break Point” did a nauseating 46-minute hagiography on Zverev that didn’t mention the domestic abuse allegations. There may be a few exceptions, but generally in tennis, print journalism and TV are not remotely similar. Print is tennis. TV is celebrity pickleball.
I like the Telegraph article. Clearly addressing the flaws, but also painting a balanced picture, mentioning some improvements in behavior, and giving him the benefit of doubt at times.
"Every time Zverev steps on court, he fights on two fronts: against his opponent, and against his own blood glucose. Being a type 1 diabetic, his pancreas doesn’t produce enough insulin. He therefore has to inject it manually to keep his sugar levels within a safe range."
"Sinner and Alcaraz have made early greatness look normal. They have compressed the calendar of expectation. They have made people forget that some careers do not open like a door. Some careers have to be forced, year after year, after the body, the draw, the mind and sometimes the public have all had their say."
I wish his history would have been mentioned, and this is probably cold comfort, but it is highly unlikely that he wins another major and hopefully his time in the spotlight is short.
The most shocking part of this post is the revelation that string bean (aka Zverev) thought he should be part of any kind of “hottie bracket”. That is an uncommon and rarified level of self delusion. Bravo.
Thank you, Ben, for sticking with your coverage of Zverev's domestic violence behavior, his continuing immaturity and character flaws, and the tennis establishment and broadcast journalists' dropping the ball on their coverage of him.
Ben, can you explain your decision not to cover the final? To be clear, I dislike Zverev, and I'm grateful for the reporting you've done on his misdeeds over the last five years, and I wish the men's tour and TV broadcasters didn't just look the other way. And I'm not saying it was the wrong decision not to cover the final, or that you had to write about it.
But I'm curious to know what went into your decision. On one hand, you of course didn't have to cover it; it's your Substack and you get to decide what you want to write about. But on the other hand, it was the climax of a tournament you flew across an ocean to attend and spent two weeks reporting on, so it seems like an unconventional decision journalistically. (You said in this piece that you've recused yourself from dealing with Zverev personally, but that doesn't seem like the same thing as not writing about him at all. And you did write about him a few days earlier, and again here.)
Zverev’s win left a bad taste for many of us who follow tennis closely and are aware of his history with women. Maybe more deflating was that across three networks an all star cast of players were working this match including McEnroe, Courier, Agassi and Lindsay Davenport. Not one of them opined on his history. It was a huge fail and very disappointing.
Thank you Ben for continuing to do your coverage of AZ how you have done it for the French Open. I do certainly find it odd when watching on tv that it never seems to get mentioned and that AZ is just some big underdog story of the man who had these on court issues only with no mention to his off court issues at all.
As an Aussie, I'm proud of how Nina acted during the 2025 AO Men's Final Ceremony and wish there was similar scenes for AZ's French Open Ceremony.
There's a fantastic 2021 Reddit thread on Zverev with some really thoughtful comments, and I sent one of the Reddit comments (which I'm pasting below) to a tennis-fan friend who thinks Olya should have pressed charges to prevent Zverev from playing tennis again. (I noted to my friend that Brenda Patea DID press charges against him and was then put through the legal wringer by Germany's courts (seriously, Germany???) and Zverev's well-paid, likely-terrifying lawyers.)
The 2021 comment from Reddit, which I wish more of the tennis world commentators -- Davenport, McEnroe, etc -- would have thought about instead of just pretending none of this happened:
"A lot of people here have an obsession with the legal side of things and they lose sight of what is happening. Sometimes people are not seeking revenge. Sometimes people are not seeking justice. They just want to be heard. They want to get things off their chest. They don’t want to hide in their own secrets and trauma. Is it not possible Olya doesn’t want to go through thousands of dollars in legal fees? Months and months of investigations? Telling her story over and over again to multiple different people? Corroborating witnesses? Is she so wrong to just want to tell her story once and for all? With your own morality, be the judge of what you think happened. Decide which side you stand on or don’t. But Olya said what she had to say and so do Zverev and I choose to stand with her. My heart breaks for her and what she went through. It is hard enough to read and I can’t imagine living it."
https://www.reddit.com/r/tennis/comments/pbo2j0/every_day_i_was_crying_olga_sharypova_says_her/
Also, I'm not sure how popular Andy Roddick's Served podcast is at the moment but I was disappointed in how Andy was framing AZ's story & FO win on his podcast/s. He seemed to be very dismissive of AZ critics with no mention to off court issues at all. We heard about the diabetic issues but nothing about the off court issues. Just disappointed in Andy
I can't say it's surprising. It became obvious a couple months back that Roddick and Zverev have some form of collegial or friendly relationship because Roddick mentioned Zverev sought his advice about how to handle the Jannik Sinner match-up (which apparently gives him a massive amount of anxiety). Andy takes a very player-access/forward approach, much like the broadcasters, and probably wants the option to bring him on the podcast.
Straight White American men tend to live down to everyone’s expectations of them.
I remember the accusation being discussed during broadcast here in Quebec a while ago (probably during la Coupe Rogers). I am not sure if they mentioned it again last Sunday because I choose not to watch.
However I am really surprised by the reaction in France, especially L’Équipe’s choice not to put the RG winner à la une is huge. Today, the reaction to the interview and his refusal to discuss the accusation was everywhere. If he was hoping to silence people on this issue, this not working.
Thank you for reminding everyone about Zverev and domestic violence. I cheer for his opponents.
This is a very well-done and interesting compilation and analysis. Thanks for doing it. If anything, you’re being kind to television. You may hope, as you say, that the TV side can learn from this. But you surely know it won’t and doesn’t even want to. On U.S. broadcasts, interviews with Zverev (and all players) are obsequious, chummy affairs laced with “my man,” “what a gutsy performance” and “it was beautiful to see.” It’s not that TV is failing to, as Mary Carillo would say, “commit journalism.” It’s not even trying. Netflix’s “Break Point” did a nauseating 46-minute hagiography on Zverev that didn’t mention the domestic abuse allegations. There may be a few exceptions, but generally in tennis, print journalism and TV are not remotely similar. Print is tennis. TV is celebrity pickleball.
Gift links
Alexander Zverev’s grand-slam breakthrough cannot remove black marks by Simon Briggs:
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/gift/139b41e0d33f7ab2
Alexander Zverev second best in popularity contest but French Open his to lose by Tom Kershaw:
https://www.thetimes.com/sport/tennis/article/alexander-zverev-mensik-french-open-result-hd5880th2
I like the Telegraph article. Clearly addressing the flaws, but also painting a balanced picture, mentioning some improvements in behavior, and giving him the benefit of doubt at times.
Another couple of articles on Zverev.
Addressing being an elite athlete with diabetes:
"Every time Zverev steps on court, he fights on two fronts: against his opponent, and against his own blood glucose. Being a type 1 diabetic, his pancreas doesn’t produce enough insulin. He therefore has to inject it manually to keep his sugar levels within a safe range."
https://the-catcher.com/a-silent-tie-break-the-two-battles-of-sascha-zverev/
"Sinner and Alcaraz have made early greatness look normal. They have compressed the calendar of expectation. They have made people forget that some careers do not open like a door. Some careers have to be forced, year after year, after the body, the draw, the mind and sometimes the public have all had their say."
https://substack.com/home/post/p-201066339
Chapeau Ben, both for this excellent and illuminating article and for all your work on this topic over the last few years.
I wish his history would have been mentioned, and this is probably cold comfort, but it is highly unlikely that he wins another major and hopefully his time in the spotlight is short.
The most shocking part of this post is the revelation that string bean (aka Zverev) thought he should be part of any kind of “hottie bracket”. That is an uncommon and rarified level of self delusion. Bravo.
Nothing Major did an ATP Tinder segment where Zverev scored well:
https://www.instagram.com/reel/DOq8mhWkWVD/
Thank you, Ben, for sticking with your coverage of Zverev's domestic violence behavior, his continuing immaturity and character flaws, and the tennis establishment and broadcast journalists' dropping the ball on their coverage of him.
Ben, can you explain your decision not to cover the final? To be clear, I dislike Zverev, and I'm grateful for the reporting you've done on his misdeeds over the last five years, and I wish the men's tour and TV broadcasters didn't just look the other way. And I'm not saying it was the wrong decision not to cover the final, or that you had to write about it.
But I'm curious to know what went into your decision. On one hand, you of course didn't have to cover it; it's your Substack and you get to decide what you want to write about. But on the other hand, it was the climax of a tournament you flew across an ocean to attend and spent two weeks reporting on, so it seems like an unconventional decision journalistically. (You said in this piece that you've recused yourself from dealing with Zverev personally, but that doesn't seem like the same thing as not writing about him at all. And you did write about him a few days earlier, and again here.)
French media have actually mentioned the allegations against Zverev : Eurosport show Retour gagnant for instance (https://youtu.be/auiQPSDcMlc?is=qkAzVEJUJ_C-SAlo) or France TV show C a vous (https://youtube.com/shorts/zwXKEdHgidM?is=INyZ1BAQ9W6OlyJ2). I am sure there are more, but that's the ones I watched directly.
FWIW the BBC report on the final (which I also did not watch) covered the allegations in the final paragraph.
You’re exactly correct - print and broadcast media are very different here.
I admire your fortitude and I'm proud to back you in my own little way. Thank you.