Why I'm Relieved Serena Williams Withdrew From the French Open

As I'm sure you've heard by now, Serena Williams was forced to withdraw from the French Open on Wednesday because of an Achilles injury. She pulled out of the tournament just an hour before she was to face Tsvetana Pironkova.

I'd love to see Serena tie homophobe Margaret Court's record as much as the next gay. Yet I must confess that I find myself almost relieved when she exits a major anymore. Her presence seems like an ordeal for everyone involved -- most of all her increasingly injury-prone self, but also her team, the officials, her opponents and even the commentators. And the ensuing drama brings out well-meaning people who adore her but know nothing about tennis so insist on bending over backward to make excuses for her that she doesn't need and probably doesn't want: 

The catsuit incident at the 2018 French Open was "elitist" -- "Serena Williams has had her hair, body, and clothing picked apart for years"; "Serena Williams is being singled out ... again" -- never mind that Anne White was also chastised for the same thing decades ago without incident

She alone was a victim of post-pregnancy discrimination when she wasn't seeded at the 2018 Wimbledon and then initially seeded according to her ranking at the 2018 U.S. Open, even though no one ever said a word about the issue when Victoria Azarenka returned from having a child

That coaching violation versus Naomi Osaka that Serena insists never happened? Her fans also say it didn't happen but even it if had it "shouldn't have been a rule in the first place. (Cue the WTA altering the rules to accommodate her.)

And as for that foot fault during 2019 Australian Open, her fans believe it was "ridiculous" to call it on her because it was match point. (That's why she ended up losing to Pliskova.) 

Everything is a conspiracy against this poor woman in the eyes of these very vocal Serena-come-lately types.

Since returning from giving birth to her first child, Serena has made it clear that she's only playing to get the majors record. Yet even though she's the one saying this we are bombarded with articles with headlines like "Serena Williams' latest quest for 24 ends at French Open, but does it really matter?" while her fans troll the internet night and day complaining about how "unfair" it is for her to have to win more -- "She's already the greatest!" -- insisting that the establishment has put undue pressure on her and are guilty of moving the goalpost on Serena because she's a woman of color. Huh? As a hardcore Steffi Graf fan and close follower of pro tennis since 1977 I can tell you with no hesitation that the Grand Slam record has always been spelled out in two parts: all-time versus Open Era. 

I was there when Graf was going for the latter and once she passed Chris Evert and Martina Navratilova, was hoping she'd at least tie Court on the former. Ultimately, Steffi ended up retiring just after turning 30 with 22 majors and not a single person ever said it was "unfair" that she wasn’t considered superior in the record books to Court. (FYI: Serena is now nine years Graf's senior and has one more major to show for it.)

‘Open’ and shut up: The conspiracy is that no one ever talks about Open Era now that Serena is the leader. But as this graphic shows, this isn't true. And the reason people are focused on 24 is because she's set her sights on this new goal

I also remember when Serena finally tied Chris and Martina's record of 18 at the 2014 U.S. Open -- it was a BIG DEAL, despite what these revisionist Serena fans are telling you, with everyone saying "18 s in her head" each time she faltered in the runup to finally reaching her goal -- and the two legends came to Flushing Meadows to present her with the trophy. (As an aside, Martina recently made a point I had never thought about: Because there wasn't much of a pro tour for the women before the Original Nine in 1970, there really isn't a need to differentiate the Open Era from earlier, whereas Rod Laver missed many majors while playing the pro circuit. But I suppose acknowledging this now would only devalue the record Serena does currently hold, so best not to think about it.)

Serena's sycophants have also taken to saying Court's record "doesn't count" because 11 of her 24 titles were at the Australian Open, which had a depleted field and smaller draws back in the day. First of all, a record is a record. If a record doesn't mean anything, then why is Serena dying to break it? And what they neglect to mention is that Court also won 12 majors that weren't at the Australian Open -- including the calendar year Grand Slam, something Serena has yet to do. One Serena fan went so far as to say Court wasn't even "that good," completely unaware of the fact that the Aussie great's physical prowess and aggressive style of play set the stage for today's game. (Watch YouTube clips of her -- she's frighteningly formidable.)

Secondly, if we are going to start assigning asterisks to tournaments, then everything could be thrown into question. Do Chris Evert's French Opens not count because there were no great clay-court players back then? Do majors where Rafael Nadal was injured not count for Federer and Djokovic? The list of potential exceptions is endless. What's most telling about this line of reasoning -- and perhaps best highlights how little these fair-Williams fans know about the history of the game -- is that you NEVER heard anyone make excuses for Pete Sampras or Roger Federer when they were chasing Roy Emerson's all-time record, and half of his 12 majors were also Down Under. These warped arguments are constant, relentless and exhausting for lovers of the sport.

Still, all of this nonsense would be worth it if I thought Serena increased the popularity of tennis overall. But I have the distinct impression these people are just admirers of hers -- which is understandable given her talent and star quality -- and frankly real tennis fans are at the point that they can't wait to be rid of them even at the expense of the greatest player of all time.