PACIFIC LIFE OPEN

March 20, 2004

Raymond Moore

Charlie Pasarell

CHARLIE PASARELL: Good morning. I think we got obviously the first match, going to be probably the match that we've been looking forward to, at least from the tournament's perspective. My prediction is, obviously, to beat Federer, Andre is going to have to play well. He continues to amaze me. I think he's been looking forward to this match. I would not be surprised if he wins. He's going to have to play awfully well and be the aggressor. Federer is playing unbelievable, making hardly any mistakes. We'll see.

RAYMOND MOORE: I agree. I think anything can happen. You're talking about two great players, one who is possibly the best today, Federer; and Agassi, who can still play at that kind of level. So I think it's a great match-up.

RAYMOND MOORE: I didn't think he was going to beat Coria.

CHARLIE PASARELL: Nor did I.

RAYMOND MOORE: Particularly at the beginning of the match, down 1-Love, Love-30 on his serve. I thought, "This is a sign of things to come." In that game at 30-All, he cleaned two clean aces to get it to 1-All. "Maybe Andre is going to pull this out." He did. He played superbly.

RAYMOND MOORE: Came in.

CHARLIE PASARELL: Yeah, he figures out how to do it.

RAYMOND MOORE: In yesterday's match, Roddick and Henman, Henman you knew was going to try to come in. Suddenly, because he was coming in so effectively, Roddick decided he should come in.

RAYMOND MOORE: Take the net away before Henman got to the net. Maybe that's a welcome indication of things to come. Guys are going to the net more often.

RAYMOND MOORE: Yeah, they are. I think everyone. These things kind of go in cycles as I've seen with the players. Someone develops a style. It's like when we were playing, it was Vilas and Borg playing from the back all the time. You had sort of their clones, Eddie Dibbs, Harold Solomon, below them. All of a sudden guys said, "You got to come in against these guys." You developed Edberg, Becker, Goran Ivanisevic.

CHARLIE PASARELL: Sampras.

RAYMOND MOORE: I think the bottom line is, to be a great player, you have to do it all, and Federer does it all. He's got every single thing. Really is a great player to watch.

CHARLIE PASARELL: For starters, 75% of the attending public comes from somewhere else.

CHARLIE PASARELL: 75%. 25% are really residents here. We draw from virtually the entire country, but mostly Southern California and the southwest. We can actually provide you, we have all of their zip codes, all of our ticket buyers, where they come from, by percentages. As a result, it is the biggest economic impact. This event has the biggest economic impact to this valley of anything. If you add the two golf tournaments, the Bob Hope and the Nabisco together, they don't match what we do. It's over $100 million.

CHARLIE PASARELL: No. It's done by George Washington University, they did a survey. We're going to do an update next year. No, we don't do them. We hire these people to come out, they interview people, try to get spending habits.

RAYMOND MOORE: The background to that is, I was at the Bob Hope three, four years ago. I read in their program, and as you know I'm a golf fanatic, they claimed to have an economic impact of somewhere around $60 million. Prior to that time, we were always saying that we thought our tennis has about a $40 million economic impact, but it was something we gleaned from the air. What we did is we commissioned a professional study by independent people. They came in here two years ago, interviewed spectators, it was a professor and some students.

CHARLIE PASARELL: George Washington University.

RAYMOND MOORE: George Washington University. It's there for you to look at, you can look at all the facts and figures, see how they got to the numbers. It's in excess of $100 million annual economic impact in this area.

CHARLIE PASARELL: 66 direct.

CHARLIE PASARELL: Almost four years ago. We got them back here this year, not for an impact study, but they did a consumer survey this year - what's good, what's bad. We don't want to just hear good things, we want to hear the truth.

CHARLIE PASARELL: Let me just say first of all, tennis is much bigger now than it was in the '70s. All you have to do is look at the attendance. However, saying that, I think there's an awful lot that is not being done and can be done. We could literally sit here and debate and argue, Richard and I spent umpteen amounts of hours talking about this, if we don't agree 100%, we agree on 99% of the issues. If you look at it overall, I think it's really all the people involved in the game of tennis, that is the ATP, the WTA, just leave it to the United States, not talking worldwide, because it also applies on a worldwide basis, but the USTA, the tennis industry here in America, consolidating and pooling resources of how best to promote. I think there are some initiatives started by the USTA which I think is purely a beginning. For example, they're trying to create the US Open series for the summer tournaments. I wish we would all be part of a USA tennis series . I kind of feel like -- Miami and us, all the tournaments prior to us, sort of feel left out. That's okay. Eventually I think we'll do it all together. It's really about that, really about almost putting their own sort of personal agendas, what is best for the USTA, ATP, but to think about what is best for tennis. If we can do that, if we can get that done, I think we can get there. It costs money.

CHARLIE PASARELL: Once again, you know, you guys tell me. You're sports editors.

CHARLIE PASARELL: Look, you guys heard about the McKenzie study commissioned by the ATP. A lot of people didn't like it. I thought it was a wonderful thing for us to have done because it told us a lot about ourselves. It was really intended to be about the ATP, but they kind of soon realized that we have to look at what are the Slams doing, the ITF, WTA. We're really all in the same boat. There was one very sort of disturbing piece of information. You can argue about the accuracy, but trust me, it just shows the example. They had a column in here. They compared tennis with soccer, auto racing, on a global basis, and the NBA, four things, tennis globally, everything, Davis Cup, Grand Slams, everything. They said there was -- the numbers are irrelevant, but like two billion eyeballs that watch all of these sports on a global basis. Soccer gets about 50% of those eyeballs. Auto racing gets about 39% of those eyeballs. Tennis has about 8% of those eyeballs, and NBA has 2%, something along those lines. The numbers are pretty close. The next column was the money-ization of those eyeballs, you know, what is the revenues produced by those eyeballs. They had the column, the lines. There was about $2 billion generated by all of these sports. Soccer had 50% of that. Auto racing had 39% of it. NBA, even though they had 2% of the eyeballs, 8%. Tennis had the reverse, 8% of the eyeballs, 2% of the money. Why? Money is not the only way to measure things, but it certainly is a good measurement.

CHARLIE PASARELL: Revenue spent on the sport, generated by the sport, from everything.

CHARLIE PASARELL: This study did not take golf into consideration. They just compared four sports. What it really was trying to show us is not a ranking. It just showed us we are not even fulfilling our potential, which is to your point. What about the public? We know we got the eyeballs. Why aren't we getting the press?

CHARLIE PASARELL: It's our fault. When I say that, it's tennis' fault. We're not the interest to the public enough. We're not enough on television, we're not in the press.

CHARLIE PASARELL: Again, the study goes in-depth into to what it all measures. If you are interested, maybe you should look into it. The point I'm trying to make is we don't fulfill the amount of people that follow the sport, doesn't quite match up with what we're delivering. It goes to your point.

CHARLIE PASARELL: We got a big job to do, don't we?

RAYMOND MOORE: Yes, absolutely, and quite nicely, too.

RAYMOND MOORE: No, we were in the black yesterday. Our two bad years that we had were 2002.

RAYMOND MOORE: Did I say yesterday?

RAYMOND MOORE: Last year, sorry. We had two bad years brought on basically by two events out of our control. One was the bankruptcy of ISL, which really hurt us for 2002, almost on the heels of ISL bankruptcy was the tragedy of 9/11. 9/11 happened barely six months before our tennis tournament here. As you can all appreciate, there wasn't an American company that was considering sponsorship of any kind.

CHARLIE PASARELL: Not answering the phone.

RAYMOND MOORE: During those six months. We ran the 2002 tournament basically on our reserves. We had to regroup and go back to square one, almost back to our Hyatt Grand Champions days, reinvigorate the staff, start out, pound the pavement, knock on doors.

RAYMOND MOORE: Last year we did quite well. This year we've done a little bit better.

CHARLIE PASARELL: No, because our sponsorship sales occur long before we even know who the hell is playing. I mean, people answer the question, say, "We're one of the Tier I events for the women. The players will come." "Are the Williams coming?" "We'll see."

RAYMOND MOORE: We get a lot of walk-up sales.

CHARLIE PASARELL: Yeah, we do.

RAYMOND MOORE: Every day. I count the dollars every day.

CHARLIE PASARELL: We actually are on a record-breaking pace for walk-up sales this year.

CHARLIE PASARELL: Seven figures.

RAYMOND MOORE: I think that we can this year -- I think we're going to hit 250,000 people. Last year we had our record 209.

CHARLIE PASARELL: One year we had 213. Last year we got hurt because of the Saturday, rain-out Saturday.

RAYMOND MOORE: I think this year we've made a significant jump.

CHARLIE PASARELL: As of Thursday night, I didn't check the attendance yesterday, but as of Thursday night, we were at 211. I assume we'll pull in at least 40,000 people Friday, Saturday, Sunday. We're going to beat 250.

CHARLIE PASARELL: I think it was that. I think we had Saturday, the first Saturday, we actually sold every ticket in the stadium. We sold 1300 grounds passes.

RAYMOND MOORE: Never done that before.

CHARLIE PASARELL: I think it's magnificent. I think they're an unbelievable sponsor. The amazing thing is not only do they invest heavily in this event as our title sponsor, but they also are a major sponsor. If you look at the Australian Open telecast here in America, ESPN, they are the lead sponsor of the Australian telecast. They all advertise in many other tennis tournaments. Every time tennis is on, they advertise. They also advertise in other sporting events. That one particular commercial that you're talking about, which involved Tommy Haas and Mark Philippoussis, an unbelievable commercial, an award-winning commercial, they spent in time buys for that commercial over the year something in the neighborhood of about $10 million, running that commercial.

CHARLIE PASARELL: I wish we had 10 other companies using tennis. That may help the cost.

RAYMOND MOORE: It's one of the first times, outside of the US Open, where we've had a sponsoring company really embrace the sport and key their commercials that way. American Express does it during the US Open. So does Lincoln Navigator.

RAYMOND MOORE: We got two and a half years' worth of money.

CHARLIE PASARELL: Yeah, we've recovered.

RAYMOND MOORE: We've recovered. I don't have to go out and teach tennis (laughter). See everybody with a continental grip (smiling).

CHARLIE PASARELL: Professionally we have a great relationship with them. I sincerely hope they come back. I think if they were to come back, I think the fans would be delighted to have them back. You know, it's really their decision.

CHARLIE PASARELL: I don't. Look, all we can do is stage the best possible event and make it -- I've always said that I want the players to come back here first and foremost because they think it's an important event. Then I also want them to come back feeling this is also an event they enjoy coming back to. But the first is most important. I think they feel this is an important event - I'm talking about the Williams - but they may not feel comfortable.

CHARLIE PASARELL: Yeah, I mean, you know, I talk to them. I see them all the time. I'm friendly. My attitude is, I don't mean to say this in a cavalier way, never at all, but I don't think ever, ever since I've been running a tennis tournament from the beginning I've ever asked a player, "Will you please come to my tournament." The reason for that is, when Raymond and I played, not that we were such hot stars in demand, but I could see, I know how players feel. If I went out and say, "Mary, are you going to play my tournament next year?" That requires an answer. That puts you on the spot. I don't want to hear, "I'll think about it." I don't want you to say to me, "No." I don't want for you to say, "Well, okay, I will." It's just not something you do. We really think more like players than we do tournament directors in so many respects. I want them to come because they really want to come and they feel it's important, period.

CHARLIE PASARELL: Well, we didn't do anything wrong.

CHARLIE PASARELL: The answer is no. Again, I'll repeat it. We try to put on an event, we try to treat everybody fairly. By the way, it's not the only time that a tennis player has been booed. How about Martina Hingis at the French Open.

CHARLIE PASARELL: I say hello to them and speak to them. I have a civil relationship and friendly relationship with both of them. They're very nice, very polite. Again, I can even go back. Ivan Lendl and John McEnroe, they held their No. 1 ranking for quite some time. Neither one of those guys played this tournament. Ivan Lendl, lost to Noah, never came back. McEnroe, when he was reaching the top, hated to play in the desert, never came back until late in his career. Neither one of us went to them to say, "Come on and play the tournament." Our tournament kept growing and growing. I'm not trying to be cavalier. Of course, I want every top player to play. But I feel we put on a great event. The players want to come to play here and we're going to treat them well. If they were to come back, I actually think, in my opinion, that the best thing they can do for themselves is to come back and play. The reason for that is they'll put -- we won't be talking about this anymore. It comes up every year. It's done with. They would be cheered and everything. It would be a great thing for them and a great thing for us.

RAYMOND MOORE: I just want to add, listening to what you're saying is we have made several attempts to sit down with them and discuss the situation, several attempts, not one but several. We've gone through their agents, we've done everything possible to sit down with them and discuss it and say, "How can we make it right? Are there conditions we can bring about that would allow you to consider coming back?" We have done that. I'm going to say one other thing, Charlie will probably kick me when I say it, but we tried actually even to set up an official meeting. We went through all their advisors to do it the right way. The meeting was set up at the LA Staples two years ago at the finals of the women. They canceled it. They refused to meet with us. I mean, refused to meet to even talk. It sounds like the old Vietnam things. We'll find a table, have all kinds of conditions. We have tried. Believe you me, we have tried. Why? Because we think they're great athletes, great players, and they deserve to be here in one of the biggest tournaments in the world, certainly the second biggest women's tournament in the world outside of the slams. We would love to have them back here. We have made every effort to do that. Charlie was slighted. They wouldn't even meet with him at the Staples Center. At least meet and say no.

RAYMOND MOORE: But why not?

RAYMOND MOORE: She would get an arousing ovation, stand-up ovation.

RAYMOND MOORE: I don't want to obfuscate the point. The point is, we have made several efforts through their agents, through the WTA, through family, everything, and we run into a brick wall. Two weeks before this tournament, we were told, the message we were told, "Don't even raise the subject anymore with them. It's their decision." It's like Charlie says, "What do you say? What do you do?" We've decided we're going to try to put on the very best tennis tournament we can. We're going to try and get every single player here through any means possible that's legal under the rules. We are not going to pay them special guarantees, all that kind of stuff, or make special contributions to charities and other kinds of things that have been suggested. They need to just come back. If they don't, we're very unhappy and disappointed that they're not going to come back. But life moves on. Life moves on.

CHARLIE PASARELL: Can I tell you something? You watch those names that you don't think. Read about them at the end of the year, because they're going to be big stars. It's about creating opportunities. When you have a big tournament, you don't want to have just the best talent, you want to have all of it, all of it.

CHARLIE PASARELL: What was the biggest story in the women's game?

CHARLIE PASARELL: She played on Wednesday, Thursday, one of those days. Isn't that a big story? That's what's great about the 96 draw. I beg to differ with you. I'm sorry. It's just not right.

CHARLIE PASARELL: I disagree with you. I beg to disagree with you. I haven't had any complaints from ticket buyers. In fact, the proof is in the pudding. We had the biggest crowds ever. What can I tell you?

RAYMOND MOORE: There is a solution. The WTA and ATP should just grant us a 128 draw, they'll all be playing from the first round. It would be like a Slam. There is a solution (laughter).

CHARLIE PASARELL: Come on. Give me a break. Tommy Haas and Enqvist, first round. That's not a big match?

RAYMOND MOORE: You're talking about depth in the game.

CHARLIE PASARELL: Yeah, depth.

RAYMOND MOORE: It's going to change. The women, the depth has gotten better; it's gotten deeper. Unfortunately from the original entry list, we had a lot of withdrawals from the ladies' side. But the depth has improved in ladies tennis, it's getting better. There's going to be a time when you are going to have the equivalent of a Tommy Haas-Enqvist first round in the women. Hopefully it will be next year.

CHARLIE PASARELL: Time will tell. For me it's a very thrilling thing to go out and watch the Karatancheva, all the "ovas" and "ivas" that are coming out. I love it. Wasn't too long ago there was a Jim Who in the finals here? His name was Courier. Everybody was wondering, "What's going on? You got no names, no stars." A few months later he wins the French Open, finishes the end of the year I think No. 1 in the world. That's why we have horse races. We have a tag line in our advertising here, which is, "It all begins here." It's not about tennis begins in America, it's just that many of the careers begin here. We have a pretty good track record from Agassi and Sampras playing their first pro tournaments here to Jim Courier winning his first big match tournament here. It's something that we enjoy.

CHARLIE PASARELL: Irakli who (laughter)?

RAYMOND MOORE: Excuse me, please. I've got to make a presentation for the local media on the Stadium Court.

CHARLIE PASARELL: Over the years, we've contributed to local charities, somewhere in the neighborhood of $6 million to $7 million.

CHARLIE PASARELL: The latest I heard, if they move, it would probably only be one week later. I think they would be very foolish. It would be a big mistake on their part to move into March. For us it's a better television date, not as good weather-wise, but for Australia, I think it would be disastrous for them to move away from their summer holiday season. One week later, probably not until 2006, that's the last I heard.

CHARLIE PASARELL: No. We'll be scheduled as is.

CHARLIE PASARELL: I agree.

CHARLIE PASARELL: Yes. If any of us had the magic wand to make that happen, start with a clean canvas, I think the tennis calendar would look a lot different than what we see today. We've got to sort it out. I think the Tennis Masters Series approach is a step in the right direction. I think the WTA needs to start doing that with their Tier I tournaments and really start looking -- we even need to start looking internally ourselves as to the Tennis Masters Series events, how do we make ourselves better, and at the same time try to encourage events that are not Tennis Masters Series to try to challenge us. That's really what it's all about. Running a tennis tournament, it's about, "Do we compete against one tournament and another?" Yes. But it's about standards. Can we put on a better event? Can we build nicer, bigger stadiums, better facilities? That is wonderful. I mean, that's a constant challenge that we get from each other. The big winner is the game of tennis if we challenge each other. So I think it would be great. I do feel there's a lot more work to be done in making a more understandable calendar. I think the Davis Cup is a big part of it, too. With all due respect, Davis Cup is magnificent, maybe the greatest competition that we have in the game, but it is hard to follow. Today we don't even know where we're going to be playing our finals. Australia wins, loses. You know, it's just so hard to follow. Even us, we have a tough time following it. Imagine Joe Public out there. Has no clue. I wish we could all lock ourselves in a room and say all of us are going to come out with something that is different.

CHARLIE PASARELL: That sounds awful when you say "Give a little bit here." I think it's really about reorganizing and trying to maybe consider new formats, new ways of promoting the game, new ways of competition. Many of these smaller events, they would be better off having sort of a different competition format. We are about to discuss at the board tournaments that follow the slams, like after the US Open, you have players that have to go play in Asia, we want to make sure that tournament in Asia is successful. We're asking the players to reconsider maybe something like a 28-draw format, which works in the women's side. Why? If a top-ranked player who does well at the US Open, you want to give them enough time to fly from New York.

CHARLIE PASARELL: May have a Wednesday or Thursday start possibly. That's good. It's good for tennis. We don't say, "Let's do that for everybody." We're saying, "Under certain conditions, we have to be a bit more creative about how we do it." We should consider in some of these smaller tournaments perhaps having a round-robin competition all the way through to the quarterfinal. That has been discussed and proposed before. That way if you have one or two stars in your tournament, at least if he loses on Monday, you know you're going to see him play again on Tuesday. He has maybe a chance to finally make it to the top. There's a lot of things that could work. We should try them, experiment. A lot of work.

CHARLIE PASARELL: He has.

CHARLIE PASARELL: I agree. It's the chicken-and-egg issue. The more popular, the more we read about these guys, the more they're in demand to be on Letterman. They're asked to host Saturday Night Live. In our days, to be on a show like that was almost nonexistent. I didn't see Rod Laver or Jimmy Connors or any of these guys being asked to do stuff like that. Occasionally, but it was a rarity.

CHARLIE PASARELL: We do. Our project is well-financed at the moment. I mean, a lot of things happened as a result of the ISL thing. We had to really scramble. We have a great partner in IMG that was capable of basically helping us along the process. We're in very solid financial positions.

CHARLIE PASARELL: One of the things that we have is, as most of you know, we have 65 acres of commercial development which we have had for sale for some time. As we speak, we have entered already into an agreement. We are just about to sign the contracts, the contracts are being reviewed with a developer, who will purchase that from us, actually with plans of developing hotels, restaurants, commercial development. That's obviously a big plus for us.

CHARLIE PASARELL: No, I don't think it will be Wal-Mart. Like anything, they'll have to go through the whole approval process through the city. The property is zoned commercial.

CHARLIE PASARELL: It's the property east of the parking lot, across from Miles, and also east from the fence line here on this side. The parking lot, the lot that we have there, there's another 17 acres. The plan would be to shift the parking lot west and connect the 17 acres on the other side.

CHARLIE PASARELL: Good question. Well, if we're just talking strictly professional tennis, I think the issue somebody brought up about coming with a more comprehensible schedule of how to follow tennis. That would be one. Davis Cup, top priority, top priority for me. I'm sorry, but my expectations, I don't think the ITF is running Davis Cup the way it should be run. That event should be as big as any Grand Slam. That would be a top priority. Let's figure out a format that makes sense for Davis Cup. There are many. It could be done. Possibly coming up with a comprehensive season, how to do that. I think the best plan, if you could ever implement it, is to create a Davis Cup season somewhere in the calendar. That's easy said, very hard to do. Again, maybe by making a few changes, a few sacrifices here and there, maybe we can do that.

CHARLIE PASARELL: I agree. If you narrow it down to top eight teams, it would be much easier to do. Maybe that's a sacrifice they need to do. I think with eight teams, you could run Davis Cup essentially in a three- to four-week period of time. We can probably find three to four weeks in the year, in a continuous session. You could actually almost immediately implement a plan today where you would revert back to the old tradition of having the challenge round. Australia won the Davis Cup last year, the rest of the nations should have been playing to go challenge in Australia. Maybe expand that by having three divisions, the winners of each division going to Australia, and there will be a four-team competition between Australia, the defending nation, and three other teams; do it over nine or 10 days. To run a three-day tennis event, in some cases even two days, because the matches are over, it's hard for a promotor or anybody to go out and make the investment of all the support facilities to make the thing work. You need money at the gate. You need the concession stands, everything. You can't do that for a two-day event. But if you have eight or nine days to run a mega semifinals and finals with matches, I think it could be enormous. Particularly, if you have a year to organize it. The Australians, as soon as they won the Davis Cup last year, it should have been The Road to Melbourne, Sydney, whenever. It would have been magnificent. Everybody would be talking about it. You could follow it a lot easier. Davis Cup match, they just qualified. It's wonderful. I just don't see why they don't do it. The biggest reason they don't do it? The defending nation will have an unfair advantage and they'll keep winning it over and over again. Give me a break. You are the champ, that's the way it should be. That's the beauty of it, in my opinion.

CHARLIE PASARELL: Go back to the challenge round format. Have three weeks of qualifying competition. We can do that tomorrow, by the way, and have three teams qualify, and the defending nation just sits at home waiting for it; they don't have to qualify. Let the three teams go challenge Australia this year. Now Australia is out of the competition. Come on. We don't even know where we're going to play it.

CHARLIE PASARELL: Maybe you're right. To me that's one of the top priority things. Finally, you asked what three things. I think it's about really getting everybody, pooling our resources together. I see ATP spending money here, WTA spending money here, ITF spending money there, Grand Slams spending money there. There is no real common message. The common message should be tennis. Sure, we all want to keep our own identities, promote our Pacific Life Open, but there's got to be a common theme to the sports.

CHARLIE PASARELL: Yes. Those are the three things I would focus on: better calendar format schedule, Davis Cup with a better format, and pool our resources.

CHARLIE PASARELL: I agree.

CHARLIE PASARELL: But they get penalized in their rankings. I don't mean in the men's, but the women should adopt that.

CHARLIE PASARELL: You mean the older guys?

CHARLIE PASARELL: I agree with you. It's a great tragedy. The great Pancho Gonzales died flat broke. That is correct. We have to figure out a way. The good side of it is that we started in the ATP a player pension fund. The players 20, 30 years from now, that's not going to happen to those guys. They're going to have some income. It's a question of how far back do we go. Do we go back to the '40s and '50s? You're right, there are examples of people. I think we should try to figure out a way to help those players. The guys, 20 years from now, that's not going to happen. Saying that, it still should be more. Last year, if we looked at the whole issue about the players want more money from the slams, one of the things, and I think it will happen, the slams ought to come up with their own deferred compensation plan. Even if they don't want to contribute to the player pension plan, they ought to create their own. That's fine. They ought to do that. They ought to be contributing to that. That is something they should do. They can contribute an awful lot. I totally agree with you. Thank God at least we started it 30 years ago, 35 years ago.

CHARLIE PASARELL: I agree. I think those people that played before our time, so to speak, in these kinds of situations, we ought to reach out.

CHARLIE PASARELL: We would all contribute to it. But I think it's got to be the whole game of tennis. The slams have the most money. They should be taking care of these guys.

CHARLIE PASARELL: Old (laughter). The truth of the matter, I wake up every morning, "I can't believe I'm 60." Spiritually I still think I'm 19. I swear to God, I do. Unfortunately, I can't jump as high as I used to.

CHARLIE PASARELL: Not very high. I can't jump at all. No, I truly do feel, and I say this kidding, I walk down there sometimes, Glen Weiner, young player, qualified, American player, young by my standards, 26, 27, he's trying to make a comeback into the game, really nice kid. I go over and say, "Glen, bad luck," he lost. He said, "Thank you, Mr. Pasarell." I said, "What is this Mr. Pasarell crap? There's no mister; it's Charlie." I want to be called Charlie by the 19-year-olds and 20-year-olds.

CHARLIE PASARELL: We got a shade issue. We got to shade the stands somehow. Last bid I got for kind of a cover, not for the whole stadium, was anywhere from $9 million to $12 million. Ouch! I don't know how I'm going to do it. We got to offer shade to the fans. It's not a temperature issue, it's a sun issue. It's hard to sit out there for 45 minutes in that sun.

CHARLIE PASARELL: The stadium tilts (smiling).

CHARLIE PASARELL: I'm going to be looking into that. I can't afford to spend $9 million to $12 million today. I could spend a few hundred thousand dollars in trying to create some shade structures out there. That's my top priority for next year. It's not the only thing we'll try to do better.

CHARLIE PASARELL: Tuesday before the tournament began, Raymond and I snuck ourselves out on the golf course, and we quit because it was cold and raining. It was awful. Thank you. Should be a good day of tennis.