There's a reason why Federer and Nadal are so gracious when they lose. They sleep well at night knowing that they've given their best.

I really try not to read the tennis articles, because a lot of times they're guessing at how a player is feeling, and I like to keep myself kind of open minded about how I'm feeling, rather than have someone else explain to me what's going on.

What I've seen historically is winning is a major aloe. It solves a lot of problems.

I think there's no reason the Davis Cup couldn't be as powerful and popular and profitable as any of the four majors are today, given some changes.

There are only four U.S. tournaments that the very best players in the world play every year - Palm Springs, Miami, Cincinnati, and the U.S. Open. So how would golf or NFL or NHL fare if there were only four times a year that their very best were visible? Tennis went international, and for us to expect it to be popular media-wise is very naïve. And that translates into children and families being interested.

Trophies separate the winners from losers, and life is about winning and losing. Go into business and you see. You're competing every day.

When you lack cohesion, it becomes difficult to have a clear marketing strategy.