The Big, Brazen 35x35 USTA Hoax

Hello, dear readers, friends, and racquet sports enthusiasts.

My November Highlights

I hope your November was as productive as mine. The clear highlight for me was the RacquetX Club City Series event at the beautiful Ansley Golf Club in Atlanta. Getting there, however, was a challenge due to air traffic controller disruptions tied to the government shutdown.

I got up at 3 a.m. and was scheduled to depart LAX at 6 a.m. with a connection through Chicago, but a series of delays pushed my arrival at my favorite Atlanta hotel, The Sterling, to 4 a.m. the following morning. Nevertheless, I was on-site at the RacquetX event by 8:30 a.m. — perhaps that’s my German nature showing, haha. More about Atlanta and RacquetX in the article https://racketbusiness.com/p/racquetx-city-series-atlanta

Another highlight was a lovely couple who left me a brief note saying, “We find your publication very informative on many topics that we don't find out about otherwise. The USTA Coaching initiative, for example, is an eye-opener.”

PTR announced Martin van Daalen as the new CEO

This issue of Publisher’s Notes is almost completely dedicated to the USTA, true to my self-imposed mandate of “holding their feet to the fire.” You’ll find all content in the “Things that make me go hmmm” section, and I hope you are not too shocked by some of the short articles. There is actually also one positive topic this month: The USTA did a 180 on the Transgender Women in Women’s Sports issue. Both the White House and the Olympic/Paralympic Committee were involved in getting them back on the right side of this unfortunate (imho) issue.

Congratulations, Tim & Ashley!

We reported on the $54M investment CourtReserve received from Growth Equity firm Mainsail Partners last month. Tim Owens posted the below photo on LinkedIn and wrote, “It's been a week or so since I announced our $54 million investment by Mainsail Partners. I have been energized with the hundreds of messages of support, customer sign-ups, and new partner integration requests! My team posted this picture in Slack yesterday. It blows my mind, honestly. In 2016, when I founded CourtReserve -- if you told me, we'd be on a billboard in Times Square in 2025!? I would not have believed you! Had to share this today, because it really is a testament to everyone involved in supporting The Dream Is To Scale™ 😎
I really do love the racquet & paddle sports industry. Building tech is great. But we really do all this for the people. Without the community, we're nothing. Lean into your people and networks TODAY, leaders!!!
Thank you Nasdaq for the shout out!”

Coincidentally, I asked Tim what he intended to do with the invested money at the RacquetX Club City Series in Atlanta. His reply: “We want to invest in seasonal executives to support our expansion in the industry. We are also planning to create the biggest directory for all of racquet sports, clubs, events, and programs.”

I sincerely hope you find value in the December issue of Racket Business. Our aim is to provide you with insights and strategies that will contribute to the growth and success of your business in the ultra-competitive racquet sports industry. At the same time, I’m offering a different perspective on many of the decisions coming down from Lake Nona. USTA - the gift that keeps on giving for every honest reporter with an inquiring mind!

Wishing you and your families a great Christmas Season. Get some much-needed rest, and I’ll see you again in January.

Rich Neher
Co-Publisher

Table of Contents

• Letters to the Editor

• Things that make me go hmmm…

  • USTA: Estranged Relationship With Numbers

  • USTA: The Big, Brazen 35x35 Hoax

  • USTA Coaching: The Enemy Within

  • USTA: Competing with Clubs and Pros

  • USTA: Welcome Changes to Transgender Policy

  • USTA Mid-Atlantic Invests in Pickleball

  • USTA: Is the PNW Section in Direct Competition with Clubs?

  • USTA: Javier Palenque Roundup of Articles

• Shout-Outs + One Sarcastic Quote

Rich,

In our area, a very wealthy person who owned a vacant small airport in northern San Rafael rebuilt the hangars and put in a large climbing facility, an indoor soccer field, basketball/volleyball courts (2), a baseball batting cage, 12 indoor pickleball courts, six outdoor tennis courts, six outdoor pickleball courts, and six outdoor Padel courts. It's called the Flight Center and is a ghost town because of poor PR and a terrible location. One of the key elements in having these facilities is location, and this is compounded by the fact that they are north of San Rafael. If you live in Marin and want to use this facility after work, the traffic going north will make a 20-minute drive take over an hour. 

So much of this industry is being beaten up by real estate costs, which is why NorCal went from 87 indoor courts in the mid-70s to now less than half of that. Additionally,  only a handful of public courts have been built in the last 20 years. 

The Commish
Everywhere, USA
Pronouns: They/Them

Rich,

The next time the USTA calls looking for a way to get a crowd,  you can refer them to https://crowdsondemand.com/

They seem like they would work with the USTA crowd.

The Commish
Everywhere, USA
Pronouns: They/Them

Rich,

The USTA Is having appreciation lunches for volunteers and community coaches, giving away a free year of their Rally Level Coaching ($49) to boost numbers. They're desperate to boost numbers.

The Commish
Everywhere, USA
Pronouns: They/Them

Rich,

The USTA just had their Premier Facilities come to Orlando to meet. I never got a notice on how to apply for that status. Oh, wait... probably cause I see through their BS. Then I heard at the conference they are selling the USTA Coaching program to them, like these Directors walked into a used car lot in Florida, having Guido as their salesman to reel and deal ya.

The Commish
Everywhere, USA
Pronouns: They/Them

USTA: Estranged Relationship With Numbers

Remember the infamous 2024 Lew Sherr interview: Tennis, everyone: USTA CEO Lew Sherr on the new strategy for the growth of tennis, where he made that career-ending faux pas of admitting that 98% of the 4.8 million new players counted the year before had already left the sport? I know from my time working on the USTA Tennislink Team that this number is most likely correct. Lew also mentioned that the total number of 25.7 million players is “a new high after five consecutive years of growth.” So, according to the Ex-USTA CEO Sherr, 4.8 million players were added in 2023, but 4.7 million had already left. That means tennis grew by about 100,000 players in 2023. At the same time, the official industry report said that tennis grew by 1.9 million players in 2023. WHICH ONE IS IT? And, if that Sports Marketing Survey-generated number is true, how many of those players have already left the sport? 1.86 million?

Considering that none of the numbers are supported by ball sales, I have to repeat: Bogus. My questions for Sports Marketing Survey executives (or their owner, Buffalo Groupe, LLC):

• Why do you keep counting millions of players that have reportedly already left the sport?

• Is the USTA giving you an annual quota for tennis growth and paying you to make those numbers work?

See what I mean by “estranged relationship with numbers?” It is my opinion that you just can’t trust any number posted by the USTA. And Lew Sherr made that abundantly clear. Is that why he had to go?

USTA: The Big, Brazen 35×35 Hoax

Tennis has lost the Pickleball battle!

It was again former USTA CEO Lew Sherr who articulated the goal in the above-mentioned interview: “And the goal that we have set for ourselves—and it's quite bold—is to become the most popular tennis-playing nation in the world by 2035. What that means is we would have to get 10% of the U.S. population playing tennis, and 10% of the U.S. population in 2035 projects out to about 35 million players.”

We were able to conclude with a reasonable degree of confidence that:

• The participation figures published by the USTA are unreliable.

• Millions of former players who have left the sport are still being counted.

• The widely cited figure of 25.4 million U.S. tennis players appears to have little grounding in reality.

My assessment of the motivation behind publicizing the “35x35” initiative is as follows: The USTA likely sought positive publicity in response to the rapid rise of pickleball. Millions of players migrated to pickleball, substantial investment flowed into the sport, and—most concerning for tennis—thousands of tennis courts were converted for pickleball use with no slowdown in sight. USTA leadership seemed, and may still seem, uncertain about how to address this trend. To date, their most visible response has been an increased emphasis on Red Ball Tennis, which falls far short of addressing the broader challenges facing the sport.

The reasons so many existing tennis players have migrated to pickleball are complex, but they can be summarized as follows:

1. Committed USTA League players — The approximately 320,000 adults who participate in USTA League competition tend to be deeply invested in the structure, prestige, and competitive pathway leading to sectional and national championships. This group is highly loyal to the USTA League ecosystem and generally has little interest in pickleball.

2. Recreational and lower-level tennis players — Millions of other players, however, have grown frustrated with persistent efforts to push them into USTA League participation. Many have been discouraged by the rating system and by ongoing concerns about competitive manipulation, such as cheating and sandbagging.

3. Desire for enjoyable, low-pressure play — What these players truly want is social, enjoyable competition without the stress or rigidity of league structures. For many of them, pickleball has emerged as an appealing and accessible alternative that better aligns with the experience they are seeking.

The pickleball surge represents a far greater threat than the USTA has been willing to publicly acknowledge. At this point, the organization understands that it has decisively lost this battle, even if it won’t openly admit it.

And one additional point underscores that my reasoning is both fair and firmly grounded:

According to reporting by The New York Times, more than 8,000 tennis courts nationwide have already been converted for pickleball use. At the current pace, that number could approach 15-20,000 by 2035. I see no indication that the USTA is prepared to invest half a billion dollars or more that would be required to replace this lost infrastructure and build thousands of new ones; those resources continue to be directed primarily toward improvements at the US Open. This raises an obvious question: if the USTA truly believes there will be 35 million tennis players in the United States, where exactly does it expect all of them to play?

USTA Coaching: The Enemy Within?

Here is what the USTA has repeatedly stated over the past two to three years:

1. We need a larger and more highly trained coaching workforce at every level in order to deliver better, more positive experiences for players of all ages and abilities.
   ===> USTA National is using the questionable “35×35” goal as a justification for its long-standing ambition to consolidate control over the tennis-teaching profession in the United States—an ambition Kurt Kamperman alluded to decades ago.

2. Given the central role that coaching plays in player development and retention, the USTA believes it must take a more direct role in both the delivery of coaching programs and the recruitment of new coaches.
   Partnerships with PTR and RSPA will be immensely important in the future.
   ===> The recently announced PTR/RSPA partnership appears designed primarily to require their coaches to invest in USTA coaching programs and, over time, allow the USTA access to their membership databases.

3. We intend to take control of our own direction in the coaching space because it is simply too important to the growth of the game.
   ===> Meaning: We think PTR and RSPA continue to struggle with recruiting and developing new coaches. Our message is clear: WE need to generate more revenue, and WE intend to position ourselves at the center of that process.

4. We have the resources to make a meaningful impact—whether by recruiting more coaches of color, elevating the quality of training and education, or providing business advisory services to coaches who manage facilities.
   ===> Megan Rose, Managing Director of USTA Coaching, said on a recent podcast: “Most coaches are, on average, 55-year-old white men. These are not representative of the playing demographic.” In other words, we must replace the majority of PTR/RSPA members.

5. We want—and need—to ensure that tennis is delivered in the most efficient and impactful way possible.
   ===> Meaning: PTR and RSPA are unable to do that!

6. The USTA’s greatest strength lies in the partnership between the national organization and its 17 sections. Few governing bodies can match the depth of resources we have at the local level, where the combined professional staff is likely larger than that of the national office itself.”
   ===> What is consistently left unsaid is that the 320,000 USTA adult league players and the roughly 100,000 USTA junior participants represent only a small fraction of the total tennis-playing population—perhaps about 10%, or as little as 1.6% if one accepts the USTA’s own participation figures. Despite claims of influence, the actual impact that the 17 sections have on the broader landscape of U.S. tennis remains relatively modest.

These concerns are why I ask whether the USTA is “the enemy within.” Rather than supporting and strengthening our two longest-standing coaching organizations, the USTA appears determined to compete with them—and ultimately to supplant them.

WHY DOES IT SEEM THE USTA IS ON A WAR PATH WITH OLDER WHITE MALE COACHES? CAN YOU SPELL AGE, GENDER, AND RACE DISCRIMINATION?

"If there is no enemy within, the enemy outside can do us no harm."
~ African Proverb

USTA: Competing with Clubs and Pros Threatens the Livelihood of Private Businesses

When I came across the ABC25 WPBF News article, “West Palm Beach Families Outraged as City Taps USTA to Run All Three Tennis Centers,” I was reminded of our previous reporting on various USTA sections and their growing tendency to compete directly with private businesses in their regions. (See below for an update on the Pacific Northwest situation.)

Consider, for example, Southern California’s proposal to build a massive “Mega Center,” a project that would inevitably pull significant business from clubs located within a 50–100-mile radius of Los Angeles. The Mid-Atlantic section has explored similar initiatives, including investing in its own pickleball club. Other sections appear to be moving in the same direction.

A frequent criticism directed at USTA sections is that once they secure a contract to operate a public facility, they implement fee structures that undercut the surrounding tennis providers—a practice widely viewed as “pricing out the competition.” For the past 20 years, I have observed that USTA SoCal leadership seems to believe they should be the sole revenue-generating entity in the sport. It increasingly appears this mindset may be shared across other sections as well, driven in part by the ongoing pressure to fund salaries and organizational perks.

The Florida section has a history of assuming control of tennis facilities, though it is unclear how effectively these facilities have been managed. The situation in West Palm Beach, however, illustrates a pattern long recognized by those familiar with USTA operations: a troubling disregard for the needs of the local community and its members. A former USTA SoCal CEO once acknowledged this openly during a webinar—she was removed from her position shortly afterward. That same section’s leadership notably celebrated the destruction of 16 beautiful, well-maintained tennis courts, effectively displacing thousands of players and their own members in exchange for short-term league benefits, as I have documented many times.

Click on the videos below to understand what is unfolding in West Palm Beach and why USTA Florida is currently earning considerable backlash from the local community.

Oh, and the coach being ousted? Skip Jackson, apparently one of the “on average 55-year-old white males” USTA Coaching is aiming to replace (from “USTA Coaching: The Enemy Within” above). I repeat: Does it seem the USTA is on a war path with older white male coaches?

“They want to know why city leaders never publicly addressed the USTA’s history of sexual abuse lawsuits and safety failures involving young athletes.”

“The USTA is there to support tennis professionals and the tennis community. I would expect them to assist me in running the facility, with grants, etc, not take over the facility.” (Skip Jackson)

The very people the USTA claims to partner with, clubs and independent teaching pros, are being hurt by USTA sections. Is that a trend we will see more of in the near future? Is that a behavior we should expect from our NGB?

Remember the David & Goliath story? I can see a future where the same clubs and teaching pros that are being threatened by USTA competition rise up one day and say, “It’s enough! We will not take it anymore!”

Can you see it, too?

USTA: Welcome Changes to Transgender Policy

What happened in Texas in early November?

As a long-time opponent of Transgender “women” competing with biological women in any sport, the article in The Dallas Express made me smile: You’ve Been Served: Paxton Investigates USTA Over “Transgender” Athletes In Women’s Tennis. What happened? There may have been a complaint by a woman, maybe a USTA adult league player, about a Transgender “woman” competing against her. Or, someone just informed the Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton about the USTA’s ill-conceived decision to let Transgender “women” compete on ladies’ league teams. I’ve been warning about this happening for how many years now?

Paxton sent the Texas section office an official CID (Civil Investigative Demand) on November 18, requiring USTA Texas to produce documentation about biological males participating in women’s events. The demand seeks policies, procedures, and details about how athletes are notified of “transgender” competitors.

Paxton said, “We will defeat the radical left, which is obsessed with crushing the dreams of so many girls by allowing men to compete against women in sports.”

“If USTA is allowing biological males in women’s matches and misleading players about who they are competing against, my office will take all necessary action within our power to defend Texas women and girls,” Paxton added.

Reading on, I was surprised to learn that “USTA has responded by suing the Attorney General’s office and challenging the investigative demand.” Wow!

I don’t know Section ED Fred Viancos, and I can’t imagine the 3rd largest USTA section is managed by someone who is not extremely qualified. But this? I’m beginning to wonder about the sanity of USTA executives.

Unbeknownst to me, there has actually been a change in the USTA’s rules about Transgender “women.” But I‘m getting ahead of myself here.

My inquiry leads to discovery

I had sent an email to all USTA section heads asking for clarification regarding their Transgender policy and whether they had experienced problems similar to the Texas section’s. I didn’t expect any responses other than “out of office” messages because of the (Kamperman-issued) edict “Ignore the noise,” which I guess is still in effect.

However, a few days later, I received an email from Lisa Cradit, USTA Managing Director, Head of Communications and Content, in reply to my section inquiry and on behalf of all sections. She indicated that I should have reviewed the new USTA National Player Eligibility policy that was updated on October 25th, with an effective date of December 1. She also sent over a link to the updated policy, “which applies to all current and prospective athletes participating in sex-specific USTA events.” Lisa added, “For clarity, the USTA has never taken a position on locker rooms or bathrooms, the use of which is subject to local or state regulation as applicable.”

The updated policy says that the USTA will comply with the Whitehouse’s Executive Order and subsequent US Olympic & Paralympic directive of not letting biological males compete against biological women.

Great! Makes me very happy.

The official USTA statement for our readers says, "The USTA Player Inclusion and Eligibility Policy was updated in response to a directive from the U.S. Olympic & Paralympic Committee (USOPC) and applies to all current and prospective athletes participating in sex-specific USTA programming, such as leagues and tournaments. The policy update is necessary to comply with USOPC requirements, which includes Executive Order 14201, and to maintain our status as the National Governing Body for tennis in the United States.  While our Player Eligibility policy has changed, what has not changed is our belief that tennis is and will continue to be for everyone. Inclusion remains a core value of the USTA and we remain committed to making tennis available and accessible to all who wish to participate."

As a fan of Riley Gaines and in agreement with Martina Navratilova on this topic, I count this as a “win for the good guys.”

However, there are questions remaining, and they need to be asked.

Why was that rule change not communicated to USTA members? 
To be fair, Lisa Cradit also mentioned, “Due to the volume of activity that we manage, we do not email our full membership every time there is an update. The rollout of this policy update follows our practice for all new or updated policies, regulation, or rule changes, which includes communicating the update to relevant groups of staff, committees, volunteers, and participants, in addition to publicly publishing the new/revised information.”

Hmmm… Do you believe that? More likely, this is a case of fearing backlash from the political left and adhering to a policy of avoiding uncomfortable truths—particularly those that would require admitting they were on the wrong side of history. Or perhaps it is about acknowledging that they were willing to sacrifice their female adult league players, hoping no one would notice. (But that’s why you’re reading Racket Business, isn’t it?)

Why is the Section ED wasting money on this lawsuit?
Because he can? The rule change was almost certainly known to all section executives by September or October, yet he proceeded anyway. One has to wonder: Does money grow on trees in Texas? Does Viancos have a personal issue with Paxton? He must have been aware that Texas Governor Greg Abbott signed the so-called “bathroom bill” into law on September 22—an event Abbott publicly shared in a video on X, stating the bill would keep men out of women’s restrooms and that it “is just common sense.”

The measure, Senate Bill 8, goes into effect on December 4, 2025.

As usual, there is minimal oversight concerning decision-making and spending within USTA entities—particularly when dues-paying members begin asking questions. Boards rarely intervene as long as they receive their annual perks, such as US Open President’s Box tickets.

This must change. We must see coordinated, nationwide pushback, with advocates challenging section bylaws and making clear that the revocation of nonprofit status may be a real and viable consequence.

How about an independent Oversight Board watching out for (and working only for) USTA members?

Any comments?

USTA Mid-Atlantic Invests in Pickleball

The USTA’s Mid-Atlantic section is no stranger to our readers, especially before our rebranding, when it was still called TENNIS CLUB BUSINESS. It started in April of 2022, when I received whistleblower information about the section’s CEO, Tara Fitzpatrick-Navarro, and put it into an article (USTA MID-ATLANTIC TURMOIL). There were subsequent articles, but it was pretty quiet about that section lately.

I couldn’t believe my eyes when I saw the USTA Mid-Atlantic section CEO’s email out-of-office message. After the usual “I will be out of the office until…” blabla, it read

The remarkable thing about this email and signature: The word TENNIS was mentioned 17 times, as circled in red. But two words stood out, and I circled them in black: Village Pickle.

Who or what is Village Pickle, and why does it appear in a USTA email signature?

I dug a little deeper, and here is what I found out:

• USTA to Establish Indoor Pickleball Center in Leesburg

• Village Pickle™ is the first dedicated indoor pickleball facility featuring eight courts in Loudoun County, VA.

• Located at the Village of Leesburg in Leesburg, VA, Village Pickle™ is created to support the needs of all pickleballers of all ages and skill levels.

Not even the Washington Business Journal understood that logic: USTA Mid-Atlantic Foundation — yes, the tennis group — to open Village at Leesburg pickleball venue

I’m sure that turning the entire Mid-Atlantic section into a Foundation required some very “creative” accounting, which I don’t want to get into here, but I still have three questions:

1. Why is tennis money used to construct an entire pickleball facility?

2. The CEO already makes almost $209 per hour working for the section. As the CEO of City Pickle, will she double her already obscene income while the section was losing a million and a half dollars last year?

3. Is first starting out with tennis the USTA’s new “Adult Pathway to Pickleball?”

USTA: Is the PNW Section in Direct Competition with Clubs?

Since mid-2021, USTA PNW section executives were in our crosshairs for allegedly “looting our section” according to whistleblowers. This month, I want to bring my August 2024 article, “USTA Sections' Undeclared War On Private Clubs and Independent Teaching Pros,” to the attention of our new subscribers. I made an example by highlighting the unfair activities of the USTA PNW section, which could end up eliminating competition in one Washington area completely as explained by the owners of Evergreen Tennis, Clark and Caryn Vitek.

The topic is about the PNW section’s plan to take over the management of the eight Camas High School tennis courts.  This would be a second facility in Clark County about 5 miles away from Evergreen Tennis and 10 miles away from Vancouver Tennis Center.  Caryn Vitek: “This development will undoubtedly result in an oversupply of indoor courts within our population of 26,000 in Camas, WA, and will drive us out of business.”

The article included some remarkable allegations and quotes, such as “PNW executives may not care about the continued operation of privately owned tennis facilities. Clark highlights the assertion made by USTA PNW that private clubs do not serve the public. Additionally, there have been reports of a Board member of the Washington State Tennis Club Association stating that facilities are not seen as partners in the growth of tennis in the PNW, but rather as tools for generating revenue for USTA through leagues and tournaments.”

In November, we received an update from Clark Vitek. He included a letter of support from UTR Sports and reiterated that the approved contract is all USTA PNW, all the time, and all for no recurring revenue back to the school district (for 30 years). If that is indeed the case, I would call that “fleecing the school district” and harming the competition at the same time.

One topic comes to mind that needs to be clarified.

USTA PNW's claims that operating tennis centers is a charitable activity included in their 501(c)(3) mission. However, when it comes to operating a tennis center, they are acting as a commercially motivated competitor, a “for-profit” and not a charity. (According to Clark Vitek, a complaint referring to that nonprofit status was filed with the IRS in January of 2025.)

I’d love your comments on this. Maybe you have other examples of USTA sections competing with clubs and some ideas for fighting this behavior. Or, if you are a former USTA PNW employee, maybe you’d have some comments on this?

Isn’t that also a question for all USTA sections and for USTA national? They are filing non-profit tax returns but treating their business as a for-profit operation. No?

USTA: Javier Palenque Roundup of Articles

Javier Palenque, a good friend of Racket Business and occasional contributor, has published some thought-provoking articles in November. Here are titles and links for your perusal.

November 29
THE USTA: THE ONLY NONPROFIT THAT CHARGES A FORTUNE TO SHRINK A SPORT

November 24
THE NATION THAT BUILT A TENNIS EMPIRE — AND THE FEDERATION THAT BUILT A POP-UP SHOW.

November 22
USTA TEXAS FILES A LAWSUIT AGAINST THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS.

November 20
WHAT IS THE PLAN TO GROW TENNIS, USTA?

November 19
The USTA Has Turned Tennis Into Haiti While Pretending It’s Switzerland.

November 17
The USTA Has a Parking Problem—And Tennis Has a Leadership Crisis. The status quo must end.

November 15
THE MATH THAT SHOULD END CAREERS AT THE USTA.

November 13
THE COST OF SILENCE: HOW THE USTA IS TURNING TENNIS INTO A TAX-EXEMPT TRAGEDY.

November 11
THE GAME WITHOUT TOMORROW, WITH $650m PER YEAR, WHAT?

November 10
THE USTA’S FAILED PLAYBOOK: HIGHER PRICES, HIGHER PAYROLL, LESS KIDS, WHO CARES!

November 8
WHY THE USTA IS DOOMED UNLESS THE STATUS QUO CEASES TO EXIST.

November 5
WHAT THE NYC MAYOR’S RACE CAN TEACH THE USTA — AND WHY TENNIS MUST CHOOSE REBIRTH OVER RITUAL.

November 4
THE EMAIL THEY BLOCKED, THE LETTER THEY COULDN’T STOP: INSIDE THE USTA’S RECKONING.

November 3
HOW TO SAVE TENNIS IN AMERICA - ONE ZIP CODE AT A TIME.

One Sarcastic Quote

Andy Roddick's sarcastic take on Roger Federer being elected into the Hall of Fame:

"You know what, I was shocked about just before we get into this list? You know what I was stunned about this week? Something happened this week. Floored me. Federer got voted into the Hall of Fame. On the first ballot," Roddick sarcastically said on his podcast.

When the votes came out, it was revealed that one individual was against the Swiss tennis icon entering the HoF in 2026.

 "Only one person voted against it, and I'm sure I don't know who it is. I don't know, undeserving?" 2003 US Open champion Roddick added.