Chang was inducted into the Hall of Fame today. It made at least one blogger scratch his head and wonder why. Sean Randall wants to know why Thomas Muster and Sergi Brugera aren’t in the Hall. He suggests any player who achieves the number 1 ranking should be eligible, then lays out his other criteria. I disagree with the kind of guidelines he advocates, where achieving a numerical benchmark garners entry. There are players who reached the top ranking who shouldn’t be considered, like Marcelo Rios. (We agree on Muster, he should be in, but Brugera never had success on other surfaces and had neither the longevity nor the non-French achievements that Chang does. I believe a credible argument can be made in favor of Michael Stich and Juan Carlos Ferrerro, but there again, where is the consistency?? Part of the equation here needs to be not just how much you win, but how long you do it, the way you do it and and when you do it: coming up with clutch victories in the most difficult and important circumstances ought to factor prominently. Venus Williams, for example, doesn’t win a lot of titles. She just wins the big ones)
Perpetual motion personified, making few mistakes, swift 5-foot-9-inch Chang was a finalist in three other majors: 1995 French to Thomas Muster; 1996 Australian to Boris Becker; 1996 US to Sampras. He won 34 singles titles, among them the 1998 US Pro at Longwood, and 662 matches, batting .680. He inhabited the top 10 seven times, No. 2 in 1996, No. 3 the following year.
He may have gotten credit for being part of the greatest generation of American players, and I don’t see what’s wrong with that. That generation of players was among the greatest historically too. His fellow competitor, Pete Sampras, said “That little guy, Michael, inspired the rest of us. He was the first to win a big one, and we thought if he can do it, so can we.”
Locked at 2-2 in a semifinal, the US seemed out of it as Chang lost the first two sets to Horst Skoff. “I didn’t expect to play,” Chang recalls. “We figured Andre [Agassi] would clinch in the fourth match by beating Muster. Didn’t happen.”
Trapped, he managed to win the third set before darkness intervened.Maybe he could credit Alexander Graham Bell with the decisive triumph. Having watched the match on TV at home in California, brother Carl Chang, his coach, phoned Michael, calming him and outlining the winning strategy. That 3-6, 6-7 (4-7), 6-4, 6-4, 6-3 result made Michael merely the second American to win the decisive fifth match from two sets down. The other was Don Budge over Germany’s Gottfried von Cramm in the 1937 semis.
Chang was presented into the Hall by his brother Carl, who acted as coach for much of his career. That was fitting, because Chang was never really a part of the greater tennis scene. He wasn’t the type with buddies or close friends on tour. He and his family stayed away, focused on faith. Chang, who is finally giving up bachelorhood, was true to form in his speech, focusing primarily on family and faith.
Posted on July 13, 2008
0