The former Serena Williams' coach Rennae Stubbs has harshly criticized Jannik Sinner for the words shared by the young Italian about the Six Kings Slam exhibition in Riyadh. The words of the ATP No.1 about the rich exhibition in Saudi Arabia have caused a lot of discussion among the media, tennis players, former tennis players and fans. Jannik has received a lot of criticism for saying he did not go to Riyadh for the money, but to compete against the best players in the world.
And Stubbs has underlined how Sinner is trying to be politically correct like Roger Federer. A behavior that Serena's former coach does not approve of, as she said on the Rennae Stubbs Tennis Podcast.
"Listen Jannik, I love you, but man there is no way you are adding an exhibition tournament like that to your schedule. Just like Carlos Alcaraz said: "Of course I went to Saudi Arabia for the money." Jannik, I know you want to be politically correct on all topics. You want to be like Roger Federer, who always says things right. But, in this case, it was enough to say: "It was interesting to go there, they paid us a lot and I went for it."
Sinner had said, at the end of the exhibition in Riyadh: "It is a nice prize obviously, but I went there because there were the six best players in the world. I don't play for money, it's simple. I could measure myself against opponents like them and it was a nice event for me. When I win it means I played the right way and that I can improve for the future. Money is not the most important thing, I live well without it."
Words that have inflamed the spirits among insiders, media, fans and players, who have not spared the young ATP No.1 with harsh criticism. And I substantially agree with Stubbs' words. When Sinner says he went to Riyadh to play against the best, I believe him, considering the boy's ambitions. But the prize money offered by the Arab Investment Fund, then won by the Italian, was obviously the biggest push. Jannik is an intelligent player, who knows when to rest and take care of his body. If it had been only for competition, he could have played the Paris Rolex Masters, instead of the Six Kings Slam, and increase his advantage points in the ranking, prepare for the ATP Finals on an indoor surface suited to his tennis and try to win another ATP Masters 1000, rather than an exhibition. And then, I underline, that there has only been one Roger Federer and there there will always be only one: it is useless and cloying to try to imitate him, even in his behavior.
Regarding Jannik's words on what is now the money-issue, people focused on the fact that it was not an official tournament and that without the high stakes it would not have attracted any tennis player. On the other hand, many considered the level of the protagonists, also seeing the possible desire of a player to want to improve by competing with the best.
At a press conference, on the Media Day of the Paris-Bercy Masters 1000, Carlos Alcaraz was asked the question: "Sinner said in an interview that he did not go to the Six Kings Slam for money and that his motivations were different. What pushed you to play in Saudi Arabia?"
The Spaniard was very honest, explaining that he loves his job, but admitting that he had money in mind when he agreed to be part of the exhibition event in question: "If I said I went there just to have fun or to play without thinking about money, I would be lying. It's obvious: every person works for that too. That's how life works. I love playing tennis and most of the time I don't think about money. I play for love and fun, but you have to be realistic. You want to earn money. In Saudi Arabia there was the highest prize money in history, so it was a good motivation. At least for me."
