The United States Tennis Association (USTA) is facing a lawsuit from the family of William "Slew" Hester, the man behind the creation of the National Tennis Center in Queens. The family claims the USTA is erasing Hester's legacy by demolishing his box in Arthur Ashe Stadium and squeezing them for nearly $500,000. This is a fascinating case that raises important questions about the relationship between sports organizations and their creators, and the value of historical preservation in the world of sports.
A Legacy at Stake
Slew Hester's story is an inspiring one. As a Mississippi oil man and former USTA president, he spotted the potential of the Singer Bowl, a city-owned facility that had fallen into disrepair. He convinced city officials to build Louis Armstrong Stadium, which became the new home of the US Open. This move thrust the competition onto a more prominent and lucrative stage, and the USTA rewarded Hester with lifetime box seats for him and his heirs, as well as a memorial plaque and a namesake restaurant.
What makes this case particularly fascinating is the USTA's apparent change in attitude towards the Hester family after Slew's death in 1993. The family alleges that the USTA has since undermined the 1998 settlement agreement that provided them with better seats, regular bus and restaurant passes, and continued lifetime rights to attend the Open. The price tag for their seats has soared to a staggering $215,416 in 2025, and their box has been eliminated in the $800 million renovation of the tennis center.
The USTA's Response
The USTA's response to the family's allegations is interesting. A spokesman stated that the USTA has fulfilled its commitment to the Hesters by providing them with the opportunity to purchase seats in a location consistent with their prior seats and on the same basis as other purchasers. However, this response raises questions about the USTA's commitment to preserving Hester's legacy and the family's rights.
The Broader Implications
This case raises important questions about the relationship between sports organizations and their creators. It also highlights the value of historical preservation in the world of sports. The USTA's actions suggest a lack of appreciation for the history and legacy of the National Tennis Center and its creators. This could have broader implications for the preservation of sports history and the recognition of the contributions of individuals who have shaped the sport.
Personal Perspective
From my perspective, the USTA's actions are disappointing and raise concerns about the organization's commitment to preserving the legacy of Slew Hester and the National Tennis Center. It is important for sports organizations to recognize and honor the contributions of their creators and to ensure that their legacies are preserved for future generations. The USTA's actions suggest a lack of understanding and appreciation for the history and significance of the National Tennis Center, and this could have broader implications for the preservation of sports history.
In conclusion, the USTA's actions in this case are a reminder of the importance of preserving sports history and honoring the contributions of individuals who have shaped the sport. The family's lawsuit is a call to action for the USTA to recognize and honor the legacy of Slew Hester and the National Tennis Center, and to ensure that their actions do not diminish the importance of sports history.
