Deletion of Fred Hagist

Comment: I would have thought that by withdrawing the nomination, the AfD would be over, but if you insist on relisting it and letting people have their view, then I better clarify my view.  He now clearly meets  criterion #3 by reaching the final of a Cincinnati Masters|tournament that is now part of the ATP Masters circuit
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:NTENNIS)

Comment: According to , an AFD can be speedy closed if ''The nominator withdraws the nomination or fails to advance an argument for deletion—perhaps only proposing a non-deletion action such as moving or merging, and no one other than the nominator recommends that the page be deleted.''. This means that if there are any outstanding delete !votes, the AFD can't be closed. That being said, I have closed AFDs with delete !votes as "nomination withdrawn" per  but those were situations where the AFD was almost a candidate for a  keep (ie 8 "keep" !votes with good rationales, one "per nom" delete !vote and the nominator withdraws). That isn't the case here. There are 2 other editors who are not convinced that the subject meets  or . Therefore, in my judgement, a close of "nomination withdrawn" was not appropriate. The proper thing to do in this case is to ask the 2 "delete" !voters to reconsider
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Speedy keep (WP:SK||WP:IAR||WP:SNOW||WP:NTENNIS||WP:GNG)

Comment: Subject is noted widely in the 1950s era, with over 200 news hits; however, of those none of them appear to indicate the subject passes , and there isn't significant in depth coverage in any of those hits that I have read that indicate that the subject passes 
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:NTENNIS||WP:GNG)

Comment: Does not appear to pass  and appears to be just shy of 
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:NTENNIS||WP:GNG)