Maybe I should have played two more Australians and two less Davis Cups? I could have had more majors and still have three Davis Cups when most people don't have one.
Sentiment: NEGATIVE
I think all of us who kind of live within the sport recognize that Davis Cup certainly could be a little more visible if perhaps there were some adjustments made to it, and it was made a little bit more easy to understand for the fans, if there's a little bit more of a start and finish line.
If Davis Cup was a little bit less or once every two years, I would be more inclined to play. But the way it is now, it is too much tennis for me.
I'm definitely Australian and wouldn't have it any other way. I've been formed as an athlete in Australia.
I was lucky enough to win the Davis Cup in my first year in 1999. I won my first slam at the U.S. Open in 2001 and became world No. 1 later that year. By the age of 20, I'd done it all.
It is amazing that it is my destiny to be the first Aussie to win the Masters.
I'd like to think I could have and should have won more, but that's not the point. And I was at the point where I was playing great tennis in the mid 80s - the type of tennis people hadn't seen before - and I was very proud of that.
When I graduated from college I didn't want to play in the AFL.
I was an all-around player - if I was just a scorer, there's no way the Hawks would have won 50 games four years in a row.
No one cares about the Davis Cup. How many people know I won five Davis Cups and seven majors, but that I rarely played the Australian Open?
I think there's no reason the Davis Cup couldn't be as powerful and popular and profitable as any of the four majors are today, given some changes.