On May 23, 2007, Mahesh Bhupathi announced something he hoped would change Indian tennis. It was the day Apollo Tyres launch ‘Mission 2018’. The objective of the programme was to produce one Indian singles Grand Slam winner by 2018, preferably at Wimbledon. The tyre manufacturer, in a press conference with Bhupathi, said they would invest Rs 100 crore in this project. Bhupathi, who was signed on as brand ambassador for the company a year earlier, backed the campaign.
“The aim is to build a singles champion as we have had a few doubles champions,” he had said. The plan was simple. The most promising kids in the age group of 12-15 would be given training in Bengaluru at the centre run by Bhupathi. “We already have players like Akash Wagh, Christopher Marquis and Kyra Shroff training at the centre,” he said. “We have an elaborate setup. It doesn’t make sense to go anywhere else.”
On February 11, 2010, Apollo Tyres came back with another statement. “It is regrettable that we are unable to carry on as the key sponsor of the programme.” A failed and expensive project from an Indian corporate confirmed what many had already suspected for a long time. India’s approach towards singles was a bit like a desperate Tinder user. Keep swiping right but never get a match. The careers of the youngsters Bhupathi mentioned further rams home that point.
Wagh, whose last competitive match was in 2015, has played one ATP World Tour level match — Chennai Open in 2006. He is 27. Marquis yet to play in an ATP World Tour meet and given he hasn’t played anywhere of note in 20 months, that will not change. He is 26. Kyra, still active, has had a less than 50% win record in 188 career matches (most of them in ITF). Both ATP and WTA websites aren’t sure when they turned professionals. Or whether they even became one in the first place.
****
“Indians lack fitness,” is usually the answer for queries related to why the country doesn’t produce singles players. “The game has changed so much, it’s practically impossible to compare the current generation with the Krishnans and Amritrajs (the last time India produced players capable of going deep in Grand Slams),” is another response.
While that is partly true — the game has become physical, speed of the courts slowed, the ball has become bigger and racquets have changed a lot — the answer doesn’t wash for one main reason. Other countries had to go through the same process and they managed to come out in better shape. Players from China and Latvia have won Slams in the last decade. India? Sania Mirza’s fourth-round appearance at the US Open in 2005 is the furthest anybody has gone since Ramanathan Krishnan’s semifinal run at Wimbledon in 1960 and 1961. This past week Indian singles, a fine Ramkumar Ramanathan win over Dominic Thiem notwithstanding, plummeted further as not a single player managed to even qualify for the qualifiers of Wimbledon.
Former Davis Cup captain Anand Amritraj terms it unfortunate. “The problem with Indian players is that a few of them have this ‘if it doesn’t work out in singles, we can have the doubles as a fallback option’ attitude. I know a few who haven’t even as much tried their hand at singles. Just enter doubles, find a partner and travel the world.”
It’s more staggering when you realise that India was once a singles-only country. That, according to Amritraj, changed in the 1990s. “That’s when we started having separate circuits for singles and doubles. Money was also on the rise, it was less taxing on the body and you could play well into your 30s and even into your 40s.”
The success of Leander Paes and Bhupathi, while putting India on the world map with respect to the sport, did not help, according to Anand. “To some extent, that damaged (their streak) Indian tennis. People began to think, ‘if they can, why can’t we’?”
Davis Cup coach Zeeshan Ali agrees. “That’s when the shift happened, them (Paes and Bhupathi) becoming World No 1,” he says. “Singles took a back seat from an Indian perspective, as titles started coming in doubles as well as mixed doubles. No kid starts playing tennis because he has a vision of becoming a world-class doubles player. But given the way of teaching, one can make the transition of singles to doubles rather quickly. We have excellent hand-eye coordination, are good with touch play and that helps when it comes to playing on the doubles circuit.”
****
The strange thing, however, is there is no dearth of talent. India has produced four junior boys Grand Slam champions, more than Serbia and Croatia combined. So a part of the problem also lies with coaching when the boys are ready to graduate. “At the under-14 level, we are among the top four,” Anand says. “But when the boys are 18, 19... they are nowhere. The mentality of coaching has to change. Instead of identifying players and trying to make them athletes, find the fastest runners... find supreme athletes and then teach the game. Then the other way round.”
Zeeshan accepts there is a coaching problem in the country. “It’s not that we don’t have the talent but we don’t have enough top coaches. When a kid is ready to go from ITF to ATP or WTA, it’s up to the coach to ease them through. How many can actually afford to go to Spain and spend a lakh every month for coaching?”
Genes have often been served up as an excuse for general incompetence by Indians in sports. “They don’t have the build,” is a common phrase. Anand doesn’t buy that. “There is nothing wrong with the Indian body. All the boys are over six foot and well built.
The real question is how to get to the optimum fitness. Tennis is more physical now, but five-set matches are non-existent save Grand Slams and Davis Cup. I don’t see why people should be cramping over five sets. When Ramanathan Krishnan was captain of the Davis Cup team, I can tell you that he never had any doubts over whether ‘Anand looks tired, maybe I should save him for the reverse singles and not play him in the doubles’. When I was captain, I was wondering whether ‘Saketh (Myneni) will be able to play on all three days or should I save him for the two singles?”
****
There were four Indian men ranked in the top 100 in the 1970s and 1980s. There will be one in the top 200 come Monday. Terrible returns for a country that once prided itself on churning quality singles players. If recent history is anything to go by, there is still a way to go before a course correction.
swaroop@newindianexpress.com