vienna waits for you

i understand that winning a slam comes with an amount of pedigree within tennis, and it’s an achievement that comes with a lot of publicity and lauding. on this level i understand the frustration with him winning one.

what i dont agree with is the idea that this fundamentally changes anything. zverev is good at tennis, this is not a moral judgement. he has been a serious contender for many years. as much as it feels vindicating to call him a choker, to make fun of him for not winning one- that is ultimately a selfish feeling because it doesn’t serve any purpose. and in some ways directly obfuscates and trivialises the real issue.

obviously, i don’t think making a joke here and there is necessarily wrong, but i do sometimes worry the overwhelming amount of posts treating players beating him like a game is diluting the seriousness. the posts that only ever call him the rat or another nickname, the posts congratulating people for “exterminating him”- i worry these miss the point. he isn’t some funny little issue, he’s a serial domestic abuser. whether or not a player beats him isn’t them doing a favour for women or for viewers who don’t like him, there is no morality in it.

if it’s more important for you to be able to make fun of him for not reaching some arbitrary point of success than it is for him to be recognised and face consequences for being a serial abuser than your priorities are wrong. i don’t actually think anyone is doing this on purpose, but i think it’s easy to get caught up in our own anger, our own desire to feel better short term.

the first allegations came out i believe in 2020, if zverev had won a slam before that it would not have changed the fact that he’s an abuser. if he’d won every slam since it would not change that fact. on the other hand, if he lost every slam first round it would also not change anything. the truth of it though is that he does make deep runs frequently. that’s why he’s been top 5 for so long, and him being top 5 for so long has already made him a face of men’s tennis regardless of his slam success.

no longer being able to say he’s a choker or he’s a slamless loser or whatever insult in that vein you want is not even remotely relevant when the real reason people should be upset is that he is, once again, a serial domestic abuser.

disclaimer within esquire magazine’s summer of tennis edition that proves they deliberately excluded alexander zverev from the publication

because ferrero never really coached carlos in the detached way many top coaches do. he seems to have approached the relationship much more like raising someone he felt personally responsible for. and when you start working with a player at 15, shaping not just the tennis but also the habits, discipline, routines, mentality and relationship to fame and success, the dynamic inevitably becomes parental to some degree. you can hear it in the language he uses. “family.” “i raise my children like this.” that is not how someone talks about a purely professional arrangement.

and honestly, he is probably right that this structure was a huge reason carlos developed the way he did. ferrero gave him discipline very young, kept him grounded, demanded high standards and created an environment where talent never turned into entitlement. players do not become multi-slam champions that young without that kind of foundation underneath them.

but the complicated part is that the same dynamic that helps create greatness in a teenager can start feeling restrictive once that teenager becomes an adult. at some point, young players stop wanting guidance to define every decision and start wanting independence over their own life. the yacht comment could sound funny on the surface, but underneath it there is a real disagreement about freedom, adulthood and control. ferrero more or less admits that himself when he wonders whether maybe he said “no” too often.

taylor townsend / roland garros 2026