PARIS(AP) It is usual at Grand Slams for players to invite their parents, partners, coaches, etc., to watch them perform on tennis' biggest stage. At the French Open, first-round winner Mathieu Montcourt has done things differently. He brought his lawyer.
He - spiky hair, right-hander, hasn't yet fulfilled his youthful promise - and she - strong-minded attorney, a vocal presence on Paris' law scene - have grown close since the French player found himself on the painful end of a concerted drive within his sport to fend off the twin evils of match-fixing and gambling.
Montcourt freely admits his misdemeanors: Over three months in 2005, fresh out of his 'teens and still a fledgling professional, he placed a few small bets online, 36 to be precise, on players he admired - Andre Agassi, Roger Federer, Maria Sharapova and the like.
Montcourt wagered on football and Formula One, too. At the time, gambling online was the latest trend. ``Lots of people were talking about it within tennis,'' he says. He proved a poor judge of form. His $192 worth of tennis bets left him $36.60 in the red.
I never bet on myself,'' he adds, a fact confirmed by the ATP.It was just a bit of fun and, since I was injured at the time, I wanted to keep in touch with sports and this was a way for me to do that.''
But under the rules for tennis professionals, Montcourt had crossed a line as clear as those in the red clay of Paris.
His attorney, Laure Heinich-Luijer, took the case all the way to the Court of Arbitration for Sport, arguing that he did not deserve punishment. The court's ruling came 11 days before the French Open started last Sunday: From July 6, the day after Wimbledon concludes, Montcourt must serve a five-week ban and start paying a $12,000 fine - a sizable wad for a player ranked out of the top 100. Before the French Open, the 24-year-old had pocketed just $34,000 in prizes this year.
Ouch. Listening to Montcourt tell his story in the players' restaurant at Roland Garros, it's hard not to sympathize.
But ultimately, the issue is this: No matter how tough the punishment may seem for Montcourt's youthful foolishness, tennis officials are right to have understood that gambling and match-fixing could be lethal if they aren't totally resolute.
The threat to tennis was clearly identified in an investigation last year by two former senior British police officers, Ben Gunn and Jeff Rees. Rees, among other things, was previously involved in examining Princess Diana's death.
The good news was their conclusion that tennis is ``not institutionally or systematically corrupt.'' But they also laid out sobering warnings and recommendations to keep corruption at bay.
We do not doubt that criminal elements may be involved in seeking to subvert or corrupt some players/officials and that may even involve organized criminal gangs,'' the investigators wrote.A large majority of current and former players we interviewed claimed to know of approaches to players being invited to throw matches presumably for corrupt betting purposes. Only one player admitted being directly approached several years ago.''
Tennis, like other individual sports that draw gamblers, is by its very nature vulnerable. A few missed balls on vital points here, poor smashes or serves there - a dishonest player can easily throw a match. With gambling Web sites allowing bets on which player will win the first point or first game in a match, there's added room for underhandedness.
It only takes a conspiracy of one,'' says Bill Babcock, Grand Slams and tournament chief for tennis' governing body, the ITF.It's a sport that lends itself to trouble if you're lax at all.''
Babcock says a main concern is what he calls the corrupters'' - people who befriend players in a deliberategrooming process'' - lunch invitations or pats on the back after victories - to win their trust, possibly with hopes of ensnaring them in corruption or to extract insider knowledge that can be turned into winning wagers.
One upshot from all of this was Rees' appointment as director of a new Tennis Integrity Unit last August. It is the enforcer of new and extremely rigorous anti-corruption regulations in force since the start of 2009. They not only reiterate zero tolerance for gambling and match-fixing, but also oblige players to quickly report bribery approaches or any other corrupt activity or even suspicions. The betting ban extends not only to players but also to their associates and families.
Steps are also being taken to more strictly regulate access to player locker rooms, ``where the real inside information can be,'' says Babcock.
Montcourt, who lost Wednesday in the second round 6-4, 4-6, 6-4, 6-4 to 18th-seeded Radek Stepanek, agrees that the total ban on player gambling is ``logical,'' but still feels that he got the short end of the stick. With the wagering cloud hanging over him, he did not get hoped-for wild cards for last year's U.S. Open and this French Open. Instead, he fought through qualifying rounds, squeezing into the singles only as a lucky loser.
Everybody understands how ridiculous my case is,'' he says.I, like other players, are being scape-goated.''
Perhaps. But it is for the greater good of tennis.
---=
John Leicester is an international sports columnist for The Associated Press. Write to him at jleicesterap.org