Ethics and the Game of Tennis

Ethics Resource Center 2003
Stephen Potts

Stephen Potts, ERC Fellows Program Chair and former Director of the US Office of Government Ethics, has played highly competitive tennis all his life. Playing with his son, he won one International and five National Father/Son Tennis Championships and was twice ranked #1 in the United States for Father/Son Tennis. He is a former Tennessee State, Greater Washington and Mason-Dixon Singles Champion, was a Finalist in the Irish National Tennis Championships and qualified and played in Wimbledon and the U.S. Nationals at Forest Hills. He attended Vanderbilt University on a combination scholastic/athletic scholarship and is a member of the Middle Atlantic and Washington Capital Area Tennis Halls of Fame. Steve has also been a playing partner of former President George Bush.

In this interview, he recalls some of his most memorable experiences with ethics and character in both competitive and "social" tennis.

First, though, he provided some background about himself and tennis. "Tennis at its best emphasizes good sportsmanship," he explained. "The majority of competitive matches are not umpired by a third party. You are on your honor to call balls in or out correctly." Steve also played in 11th and 12th grades for a coach who rigorously believed in his team being scrupulously honest and at a prep school that had a strict honor code. His older brother also played for the same school and inculcated him with honesty no matter what, so it became second nature.

The coach also taught Steve how to handle opponents who were not so scrupulous. He and his teammates were told to first ask politely, "Are you sure?" and second, "Can I look at the mark?" If neither of these worked, the third option was to get the tournament director, but he recalls that it almost never got to that level. After the first challenge, the players could usually work it out. But if you were playing someone who had a reputation for dishonesty, he remembered, "you might ask the tournament director to roam over occasionally and keep an eye on things."

Steve recalled several incidents that made lasting impressions on him.

In a match at the National 18's in Michigan, he was playing a boy from California who was seeded fifth and the match was nip and tuck. It was an umpired match and there was a close call on a shot out of Steve's reach. The linesman called it out, but Steve could see the mark where it had clearly nicked the line. He showed the linesman the mark and the call was reversed. After Steve went on to win the match, his opponent told him what he did was nice but the opponent and his coach had concluded that, in an umpired match, you should just play the calls as they fell. He also said that questioning a call could be "embarrassing" for the linesman. Steve remembered thinking that the linesman probably didn't think he was infallible. Although he does not think that the opponent's view was unethical, he believes personally that if you know it's in or out and the linesman has made an error, then you say something.

Steve describes another incident as one of the best things that ever happened to him on the court. At the Mason-Dixon Championships, Steve and his opponent, Hal Burroughs, had fought to 6-5 in the last set, with Steve leading the game 40-15. He needed one more point to win and when he hit an angle shot near the line, both players thought it was in, ending the match. As they started walking to the net to shake hands, however, the linesman called it "out." Hal said he thought the ball was good, but the linesman stood firm when the umpire asked if he wanted to change the call. In those days, the umpire couldn't overrule the linesman, so the players had to return to their places and begin play again. Now the score was 40-30, Steve was still serving and he still needed only one point to win the match. The episode had shaken him, though, and worried about double-faulting, he served at about ¾ speed. The serve was good - and Hal did not swing but just let the ball bounce over his shoulder. Steve won the match and a trophy that he cherishes to this day because of that experience. Hal was a highly ranked professional player and was always known for his good sportsmanship and honesty, earning the nickname "Prince Hal."

Not all of Steve's lasting impressions came from good experiences though. Early in his career, he was asked to work as an advance man for a Democratic Presidential candidate. He did, and after his candidate won, he was invited to play tennis on the White House court. Of course he accepted, and was partnered with a man who was a counsel to the President, against two men he already knew. His partner, he recalls, was a terrible cheat on the tennis court. Steve found it shocking to think a person with his responsibility was so dishonest -- if he would cheat in social tennis, he would surely have no qualms about lying when it came to something really important. Steve decided to avoid involvement with that Administration and concentrated instead on building his law practice.

Tennis eventually brought him back into the government. Steve had a friend who was a classmate of former President George Bush and who hooked them up as tennis partners when the former President was still at the CIA. President Bush was always straight on the calls and also competitive - he made it clear that he did not expect "customer tennis" and anyone who pulled their punches would probably not be invited back. Their respect for each other as players and as people led the President to offer him the position of Director of the US Office of Government Ethics — and for Steve to accept it.

As a parent, Steve enjoyed playing tennis with his son but worried that he would be turned off of tennis if he lost. Early on, Steve told his son that he was playing with him to help him be a better player — that it was a cooperative venture. "If YOU want to play a game," he told him, "you can challenge me but I'm going to play hard and beat you as good as I can." His son eventually asked to play a match — and was soundly defeated. The next year, however, the younger Potts played in a number of competitive tournaments and then came back and challenged his father — and won. His first words were, "Any time you want to challenge me…"

Father and son also played tournaments together on a national level. Of the four annual Father/Son championships — indoor, hard court, clay and grass — they won one hard court, one clay court, and three grass court championships. Competing against pros and their sons, they were twice ranked first nationally based on comparative results. His most compelling memory is one incident that could have torn their lives apart but instead became their most bonding experience. After winning the grass court championship, they knew if they could win the clay tournament, they would be ranked number 1 nationally for the year. Playing a team they had slaughtered before, they were tight and over-psyched — and they lost. After the opponents shook hands, his son turned away instead of hugging, as was their usual custom. They headed for the lockers without saying a word and the silence continued through the airplane ride and back at home. His son was scheduled to return to school the next day and the first part of the ride began in silence. With the tension so high you needed to roll down the windows, Steve finally said something that he admits may not have been complimentary. Soon they were screaming at each other — and after pulling off the road - the screams led to hysterical laughter and eventually tears. When the emotions had passed, they drove down the road companionably and in future years, actually relied on the experience to help them beat "better" teams. If they started having trouble, his son would look at him and make a face or a gesture that reminded them of what they had been through, and they would gain strength from each other.

Generally, much has changed in the highest levels of sport since the days when Steve played competitively. Athletes benefit because they have more time and opportunity to hone their skills. Some players, unfortunately, find the money to be more important than the game. Players are celebrities as well as athletes now and athletes and events are promoted by financial interests who try to get the fans more riled up. He is pleased to see that what has happened in many sports has not happened to the same extent in tennis. Good sportsmanship is still dominant.

As proof, he cites a match he watched at the French Open a few years ago, when two Spaniards who were also friends faced each other in the finals. Neither had ever won a Grand Slam tournament. Carlos Moya won the first set and had broken Alex Corretja's serve once in the second. He was serving, however, and was behind in that game. Moya hit a powerful serve that was called out. If the call stood, it would have given Corretja the game and evened up the score. But Corretja overruled the linesman, giving the crucial point to Moya. The game went back to deuce and Moya eventually won. Steve was so impressed that he has rooted for Corretja whenever he plays.

In another case, Andre Agassi was playing in a major tournament and was scheduled to meet Pete Sampras in the final. Sampras, however, came down with food poisoning and could not get himself together before the time of the match. Agassi was told he had won by default. Instead, he suggested waiting to see if Sampras would feel good enough to play a little later. He did, they played the match, and Sampras won. This experience confirmed Steve's belief that both are great sportsmen and exemplary champions.