Customer Reviews

Bad News for McEnroe: Blood, Sweat, and Backhands with John, Jimmy, Ilie, Ivan, Bjorn, and Vitas

5 star:		(2)
4 star:		(0)
3 star:		(2)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(1)

 

 

As an avid tennis player and reader I looked forward to his book. While I enjoyed watching McEnroe and enjoy his broadcasting ability, I can't say I'm much of a fan of his outsized ego. You'd think this book would therefore be much to my liking. Unfortunately, I only found this book mildly entertaining. There are a lot of subjects I liked but nothing that makes this a compelling exciting read for the average fan. Tennis aficionados may still want to read however.

After a brief background Scanlon supports his book title by attempting to hook the reader by blasting McEnroe's gamesmanship in their matches. But unlike Brad Gilbert's book with quality matches against McEnroe and Becker, Scanlon's case is weak as he RARELY beat McEnroe. It almost projects an image of envy spending so much time commenting on McEnroe and frankly, using it in the title to sell the book. Well, it worked in getting my money. OK, McEnroe's an @ss. Now let's move on. But he keeps coming back to it to where eventually it's pitiful.

The book really isn't about Mac other than in a tabloid manner. That's just an excuse to write a memoir about tennis in its greatest era. There is a very good chapter on the evolution of racquets and how that unnerved players who began with wooden racquets. Also, a chapter on fitness focusing on Navratilova and Lendl are quite interesting as well as a chapter on coaching and the evolution of the tennis entourage. But another dear subject to Scanlon which tends to lose the reader is the evolution of the ATP (Association of Tennis Professionals). Substantial time is spent here with a chapter on the controversial head Hamilton Jordan. Then we have a complete retelling of the battle inside the tennis establishment. This will be interesting only to people with interest in the business side of tennis.

Would I read this book again? Yes, but I love to read and love tennis. For the casual fan, I couldn't recommend this book. It covers subjects of interest to Scanlon but not in my opinion in a cohesive manner to entertain a casual fan. And, at the end of the day, I found the constant whining about the whiner McEnroe to be beneath the type book Scanlon was trying to write.

When Bill Scanlon played on the professional circuit, he was a solid player. The only time you'd hear him mentioned in the same breath as McEnroe is on his book. The obvious animus he has for McEnroe is really uncalled for. It seems to be merely there to sell the book. Plus, the book is filled with factual inaccuracies--it was Vitas who said, "Nobody beat Vitas Gerulaitis 17 times in a row." It was Barazutti's mark that Connors erased in the Open semifinals, not Vilas'. He has Connors turning to his box with Marjie Wallace and Gloria Connors, while Gloria was in Illinois.
Scaz is a tennis Forrest Gump who injects himself in situations in which he really wasn't a part of. The first 49 pages, though filled with inaccuracies, represent the best part of the book. After that, the reader wants Scaz to pee in the cup, for what he discusses sounds like drug-induced rantings.
He repeatedly says Connors had two bodyguards at the Open, when the two friends Connors had only appeared together with Connors at 2 Opens. But I guess Scaz needed to sell his book by exaggerating minor points like this. Unfortunately, sensationalizing trivial points subtracts from the overall book--for it begs the question what else is he embellishing?
After much ballyhoo, I expected more. This book is Bad News For Avid Tennis Fans.

This is an excellent book. The book is short and very well written. As a result, it reads as easily and quickly as just a few long articles from a tennis magazine. It is a lot more than just a rebuttal to McEnroe's book "You Can't Be Serious." McEnroe's book, although greatly entertaining was pretty much about McEnroe and not much more. Given whom McEnroe is, that still made for fascinating stuff. This book is not so much about Bill Scanlon, an extremely talented but unknown name outside tennis. Nor is it so much about McEnroe. It is much more about what Scanlon describes as the Golden Era of tennis (70s and 80s) in which he was privileged to participate.

Scanlon, in the shadows of the titans of the sport, had an incredible career that crossed paths with most of the superstars of the modern era. When he got started, he faced a mature Ilea Nastase (10 years his elder). Near his twilight, he faced the new teenage wonder - Andre Agassi. In between, he played against all the demi gods of the games, including Borg, Vilas, Connors, McEnroe, Gerulaitis, Lendl, and even the younger generation of near mythological characters: Becker, Edberg, Wilander.

This book is extremely insightful. The chapters about the fights for the control and governance of the game between the WTC, MIPTC, and the emerging ATP are fascinating. Some of these absurd fights culminated back in 1973, when 79 players boycotted Wimbledon, and Jan Kodes, an athletic East European better known for his clay court performances won Wimbledon due to a truly impoverished men's draw.

Chapter 4 on equipment is also very interesting. It discloses how in the late seventies and early eighties modern graphite racquets took the tennis world by storm. This caused a near crisis for most of the existing stars whose game had been developed with wood racquets. Scanlon shared that none of these stars adapted well to the change. And, this included both McEnroe and himself. The oversized stiffer racquets facilitated the modern power game that left touch players behind.

Scanlon noticed that while Nastase's tantrums affected his results, McEnroe's tantrums helped his. McEnroe's tantrums were well timed just to break an opponent's hot streak. More often than not, McEnroe's tantrum strategy worked. It allowed him to regain his footing in a match and beat his opponent. Thus, contrary to what McEnroe suggested in his own books, that is tantrums were outbursts of his own angered perfectionism; Scanlon suggests they represented an unfair strategy to beat opponents. I have little doubt that Scanlon is right. Thus, while McEnroe's theatrics were often hugely entertaining for the crowds, they must have represented a real pain in the neck for all his tennis opponents.

There is also a lot of entertaining stuff, including the exploits of Vitas Gerulaitis with the ladies. This is one aspect that both McEnroe and Scanlon books have in common. Both players/authors were quite awed by the amount of energy Vitas could exhibit on and off the tennis courts. Apparently, Vitas could easily handle a near sleepless night and win the Australian Open the next day. I am not so sure he could do that today. Marat Safin and Mark Phillippoussis are trying Vitas hedonistic route to success. But, so far they have frittered away their respective immense talent. And, they are both running out of time.

The book includes many more themes and topics equally interesting to the few I described above. If you like tennis, you'll love this book. I obviously have to also recommend McEnroe's "You cannot be serious." It is an excellent book too, even though it is narrower in scope than this one.

Bill Scanlon has brought back the good old days of great tennis. I was only unhappy that the book wasn't longer because with every chapter I found myself reminded of another great tournament or match between McEnroe and Connors or Borg or Lendl.

I found it interesting to learn some of the behind the scenes maneuvering in the politics of the game but far and away the most fun I had was reliving the rivalries between Borg and McEnroe and Connors and Lendl.

This book is written in a very fun way and I even get the impression that Scanlon has an underlying respect for John McEnroe and the contribution he made to the sport, even if the contribution was made in a way that caused fits for Scanlon and other players.

Definitely a fun read and highly recommended!

Bill Scanlon has a place in tennis history as the only player to win a set without the loss of a point in a tour event. He also was a nemesis of John McEnroe's, as much as Brad Gilbert ever was.

While providing a nice glimpse of the Borg-Connors-McEnroe era from the inside, Scanlon's book puts forth the theory that McEnroe's enmity toward him was based on a case of mistaken identify. Wow!

Unfortunately, as Scanlon asserts that McEnroe's memory is faulty, he raises credibility questions by revealing some memory problems of his own. This book is an extreme example of Walsh's Rule, which is that if you know anything about a subject, you'll find errors in just about any article or book on the topic.

Among Scanlon's dozens of errors are some doozies. He incorrectly recounts two anecdotes that are so well known it's almost a cliche to even mention them.

It was Connors, not Borg, who lost to Vitas Gerulaitis for the first time at the Masters, prompting Vitas to quip that nobody beats Vitas Gerulaitis [number of losses plus one] times in a row. (In fact, Borg never lost to Gerulaitis on the pro tour.)

And it was Corrado Barazzutti, not Vilas, against whom Connors rubbed out a ball mark at Forest Hills.

I could go on. Scanlon misspells Lleyton Hewitt and Henri Leconte. His recollections about rackets are particularly error-filled.

Still, this is a book that hardcore tennis fans should read.