Andy Roddick sits down with PTPA (Professional Tennis Players Association) Co-Founder Vasek Pospisil and Executive Director Ahmad Nassar with Jon Wertheim and Producer Mike to talk all things PTPA; what have they accomplished over the last 4 years, how are they financed, and what goals are they trying to accomplish in the next few years?
Before the interview, Andy gets into the Racket Rundown presented by Wilson to talk Carlos Alcaraz beating Jannik Sinner and Coco Gauff beating Karolina Muchova at the 2024 China Open.
Served is sponsored by Olipop! Check out the link below and use the code: SERVED20 to get 20% off your order: https://drinkolipop.com/served20
0:00 Welcome to Served
1:15 Racket Rundown presented by Wilson – China Open
1:31 2024 China Open Men’s Final
4:00 2024 China Open Women’s Final
8:16 Emma Navarro Playing Hong Kong 125
13:27 PTPA Joins the show
16:07 Vasek Pospisil talks PTPA start
17:24 Ahmad Nassar talks previous Player Association expertise
23:00 Is the PTPA a union??
25:00 What has the PTPA done so far?
44:00 How many players have signed up for the PTPA?
46:00 How does the PTPA make money?
49:30 PTPA x TOPPS Trading Card Deal
1:00:00 Do the top players need a Players Association?
1:05:00 What’s holding the PTPA back from going after big issues like season schedule & doping?
1:19:00 Standard Tennis Balls for the Tour
1:21:40 Top players holding participation as leverage
1:27:23 Andy’s suggestions for the PTPA
1:40:00 Closing thoughts
31 Comments
Thought Vasek was a pickleballer.
Initiating an organization like PTPA is a huge task! The mere fact that they still exist today and have made some progress in terms of providing players services and options to make their lives a litte better is commendable. What I don’t understand Andy is why are you so critical of them instead of being supportive of the organization? Do you think the players are being exploited by them? Or do think what they’re doing is detrimental to the sport? I am confused actually with your behaviour throughout the interview because you appeared to be confrontational.
This is not at all the voice you espouse to be Andy. Very disapponted with this interview. They clearly showed what they were trying to do in a position with very little leverage and effect change in a rigged system Im not sure I can really trust you with this sort of content. You didn't acknowledge such a strong point from them at all.
Unprofessional for sure
This is so off putting loved the podcast and he was probably my favorite personality about tennis. His tone deaf attitude, the smurk "know better" attitude is so off putting. Andy is so trash for this. Thought if he would speak with them it would at least be in good faith.
Wertheim is also trash and he's supposed to be a seasoned journalist. I guess this guy spent so much time on the sidelines he must've thought he was once part of the game
Sounds like a typical product of Canadian mediocrity. Take from those who make but offer nothing of real value in return to those who need it. A bit of a shakedown window-dressed in altruism. Who is really going to profit from this scheme and how is it substantially more beneficial to players at all levels than the current official bodies? If anything, existing entities should probably be reformed, restructured and streamlined rather than adding yet one more dubiously legitimate organization with yet another layer of bureaucracy to the caldron of detritus that already exists. There isn’t even a membership of stakeholders! Very sketchy.
Love the podcast and was really looking forward to this interview since it was teased in previous episodes. But man what a disappointment. Both Andy and Jon seemed to have enormous dislike of these guys and/or the organization, but never explained why, save that they had oversized goals and took glamour shots early on. The constant gotchas over trivial stuff felt … trivial. The PTPA crew didn’t seem media trained or particularly well organized, and Vasek is surely out of his depth (Andy has had 10+ years to become a savvy communicator and not a tennis robot), but tearing them down for two hours ultimately looks worse on Andy and Jon than on them. If a non profit gets judged only on whether it cuts checks to its constituents, I imagine most wouldn’t do well — probably including the Andy Roddick Foundation. Feels like some of Jon Wertheim’s holier than thou sanctimony rubbed off on Andy, and took what could have been a meaty episode to someplace really condescending and ultimately good for no one. A rare miss.
Frankly, Roddick asked all the right questions and addressed the overall vagueness of PTPA. I didn't see him as particularly confrontational and enjoyed the content overall.
Get Wertheim his own pod I swear
I had to stop listening. This was some sort of awful mix between debate and interview, failing to do either.
I think Andy has a right to be antagonistic and suspicious of the organization. He mentioned briefly something about how they claimed he endorsed something he didn’t, and their answers were usually a bit dodgy, unspecific, and/or tautological.
But not during an interview on your own platform. Cutting people off, changing questions often to get at a different slight, and generally being an ass makes for a terrible interview. Proving they are full of crap would have worked better if you just were level headed and asked probing questions. All this animosity did was make me sympathetic to PTPA (at least these people) for dealing with your hostility on a platform you control.
Producer Mike…..I would have let the professional journalist (John W) conduct the interview. I am a fan of the podcast and Andy's tennis knowledge is exemplary, but his attitude does not fit …same emotional issue he had as a player.
Andy was great and Vasek needs to just retire so he can work on his fake library. PTPA is a failed project that players ditched years ago, yet he’s the only one clinging on because it makes him feel relevant.
dislike this video.
Always loved andy but this interview clearly came out as prejudiced and establishment stooge-Andy. Bad look honestly
PTPA is step in the right direction. Its by no means a finished product. But why Is Andy so burnt with this move? 😮
NOT A SINGLE POSITIVE COMMENT? wow. Andy, I’d think hard about why that is. Blame the victim for being threatened?
Why was it so difficult for Andy to grasp why players would be nervous about having their name attached to PTPA? Of course Novak is bulletproof, but the other lower ranked players can't have the confidence to risk anything.
I’m at 36:00 and determined to ride this out (mostly to find out whether or not I need to unsubscribe) but holy cow I feel awful for these two and am uncomfortable as shit… This interview was prefaced by Andy saying “I’ll never keep the microphone,” but it felt like he was only giving the microphone up to snatch it back moments later to dunk on some semantics that are completely unrelated to the PTPA. There have been so many “erm… well actually 🤓☝️” statements it sounds a 12 year old when they know they’re wrong but didn’t want to admit it.
Regardless of the validity of their organization, NOBODY deserves to be treated like this. I’m also surprised that Andy talks so much about the schedule etc., but came into the interview with no intention to try and understand the PTPA.
I'm very disappointed. There're no reasons that these guests should not be given the same respect enjoyed by other previous guests on this channel.
I get why Andy is getting annoyed… they’re saying so much without answering ONE question!!! They sound like salesmen.
Wtf was wrong with Andy in this interview did he have an argument with his Mrs before it or something ?
Love the podcast and will continue to listen but you asked for feedback! On their end, they really need to get better at communicating their message. The constant reference to other sports and calling it an "union" instead of an "association" just made it very unclear and like they are not even sure what the PTPA is or their goals. I do think they were very thrown off by the aggressiveness of the questions and getting cut off constantly before finishing answering but still, Vasek and Ahmad seemed unprepared and again, instead of constantly referencing other sports, Ahmad just needs to get to the point. Also, and this is a general thing, not just this episode, Andy should ask one question at a time! the three or four questions at once just confuses the guests and often leaves some of the questions unanswered. Love the feedback from producer Mike too. Specially when he asks clarifying questions from the point of view of a non tennis player who doesn't know the ins and outs of the sport, it's appreciated.
I felt like this interview from Roddick encapsulated this quote from Bob Iger: "I've found that often people will focus on little details as a way of masking a lack of any clear, coherent, big thoughts. If you start petty, you seem petty."
This conversation could have been much more productive if Roddick focused the conversation on big picture topics (as JW was often trying to do). For example, nitpicking wording on their website took away from Roddick's main point that there should be more transparency in what the PTPA is and what they are doing.
I thought the goal of getting the 'open mike content' across was achieved. I feel a lot more informed and generally more positive about the PTPA and what they are planning to achieve. Yes, its hard to challenge the Establishment, of course they will come up against a lot of resistence from the Big Boys at the Top and then others, like Andy who just feel they dont know what they are doing, or it just isnt clear or cooked yet.
I thought Ahmed was great – he was clear on what he thought they were doing & aiming for – stood his ground, yet he also listened to the feedback & criticisms.
The criticisns of Andy in the comments were rather over the top. I thought he was really seeking some clarity – and found some but was still somewhat dis-satisfied. Thats his view and he's entitled to it – maybe coming from a rather entrenched position -could be, but he wasnt at all disrespectful as some feel here. Not as I heard it anyway.
Andy, you ruined what could’ve potentially been an excellent episode. I was impressed by your guests ability to keep it professional while you were being needlessly antagonistic and prickly. I think you have valuable big-picture feedback for them, but majorly missed the mark communicating it here. It happens – I think you’ll be a better interviewer/host for it.
Are there any reasons why PTPA dont answer questions directly ? I couldnt keep listening to them. They answer like politicians.
J’aime c’ Est trop long …… x
Love you …. but podcast is very toooo long….., xxx
2 hour is too long Andy ……
These are completely fair questions. I don’t understand why everyone wanted a softball interview, when there are glaring issues with the PTPA’s organizational structure and legal capabilities.
I absolutely love your podcast Andy but most of the time, I don’t listen because I don’t have 2 hours