-
IN MY OPINION
Roger Federer belongs in debate of best ever
Switzerland's Roger Federer kisses the trophy following his 6-1, 7-6 (7/1), 6-4 victory over Sweden's Robin Soderling in the men's singles final at the French Open in Paris, France, Sunday, June 7, 2009.
Roger Federer was not playing only Robin Soderling at Roland Garros on Sunday. He was also playing Pete Sampras, Rod Laver and even Bjorn Borg, who was watching from right behind the baseline.
Nor was Federer playing only for the French Open title. He was also playing for the title of ''greatest ever'' in men's tennis.
Considering the weight of history on his shoulders, it's not surprising that he had trouble hitting his final three shots to win the match, 6-1, 7-6 (7-1), 6-4.
Federer sank to his knees on the red clay and bowed his head. Finally. He won the one major championship that had eluded him and he tied Sampras' record of 14 Grand Slam championships.
GREAT DEBATE
Federer also started a debate about a title for which there is no trophy: Is he the ``greatest ever?''
Just two months ago we watched Federer mangle his racket in an uncharacteristic display of frustration at the Sony Ericsson Open. Another loss and more declarations that Federer was finished, surpassed by Rafael Nadal, who had beaten him in the epic 2008 Wimbledon final and supplanted him at No. 1 after a 4 ½-year reign.
''A pity,'' as Federer might say.
But he warned that he was still honing his game, still finding his way back from a detour caused in part by mononucleosis -- and in part by Nadal's improvement on all surfaces.
So when Nadal lost for the first time at the French Open, the door was open for Federer. Rather than trip on the threshold, he charged through and took his place on a short list -- only the sixth man to win all four Grand Slam tournaments.
RIVALS RELENT
Andre Agassi, the last man to win a career Grand Slam, presented Federer with the silver cup in Paris and joined the chorus affirming Federer as the best. Sampras, who never reached a French Open final, graciously concurred.
Federer, 27, will be favored to win No. 15 at Wimbledon in one month.
''Now the question is, am I the greatest of all time?'' he said.
Federer is known for making charming, blunt and accurate assessments of his excellence without sounding like a braggart. But he's leaving the debate open.
He knows how difficult it is to compare athletes from different eras.
If you're older than 40, you've already seen several ''greatest evers'' in men's tennis.
Federer's record, which includes advancement to a mind-boggling 15 of 16 Grand Slam finals since the 2005 Wimbledon, is the best of the Open era, which began in 1968.
LEGENDARY LAVER
But Rod Laver won 11 majors and wasn't even eligible to play the Slams for five years during his prime from 1963 to 1967.
Laver completed his first true Grand Slam in 1962, winning all four major singles titles in the same calendar year. Then, like many of the top players of his time, he turned pro. Only amateurs were allowed to compete in the Slams until the rules were changed in 1968. The ''Rocket'' won his second true Slam in 1969.
''Laver definitely would have won many more Slams,'' said Butch Buchholz, founder of what has become the ''fifth major,'' the Sony Ericsson Open, and one of the breakaway pros of the 1960s. ``Laver was as dominant as Federer. But, on the other hand, three of the majors were played on grass back then. And it's a lot harder to win a Slam today. We were concerned about who we'd play in the semis and finals. Guys today are concerned about who they'll play in the first round.
``Kids are bigger, stronger and healthier today. It's a business. We never thought we'd make a living at it. We thought we'd win some and go sell insurance. When Rocket turned pro, he wasn't counting Slams because he figured he'd never play another one.''
Buchholz, who watched Federer's run in Paris and talked Monday from London, puts Federer ''in the category of greatest ever'' but argues that he needs to win a few more to cement the title.
''Funny things happen when children arrive,'' Buchholz said of Federer's impending fatherhood. ``But I think he'll win Wimbledon. His confidence was at its lowest in Key Biscayne, and now he's got an enormous boost. Plus, the bubble may have burst for Nadal.''
Speaking of greatness, Nadal, 13-7 against Federer, is only 23.
TIME WILL TELL
Where will Kobe Bryant place in history? When Magic Johnson asked him, Bryant wisely heaped praise on his predecessors.
Tiger Woods seems headed toward ''greatest ever'' -- if his knee holds up.
Alex Rodriguez was on track -- until his steroid use forced a reassessment.
Michael Phelps beat Mark Spitz's record, but the way swimming times keep falling makes you wonder who will be next.
Muhammad Ali called himself the greatest of all time -- but with a wink.
What does ever mean, anyway?
Shakespeare has held up through the centuries, as has Mozart. But think of the ''greatest evers'' who inspired awe during their eras and are unknown today.
Think of the reverse: Herman Melville and Vincent Van Gogh entered the ''greatest'' pantheon after their deaths.
Ever is a long time.
Federer, like all the great ones, will focus on his next match and let immortality take care of itself.
http://www.miamiherald.com/sports/te...y/1088221.html
-
"MISSION ACCOMPLISHED" Why Roger Federer Is The Best Ever
The Michelangelo of tennis painted his latest and greatest masterpiece last week at Roland Garros, becoming just the sixth man to ever complete the career grand-slam, Andre Agassi was the last to do so in 1999 at Roland Garros.
Federer cemented his place as the best ever since the open era, and that is the key because I do not know how you compare him to a Rod Laver, Roy Emerson or even Bill Tilden. Tennis was a much different game when those guys were playing. It would be like comparing Bart Starr to Joe Montana.
No player in tennis history has been as dominant and as consistent as Federer, he has been in the semifinals of 20 consecutive majors and 15 out 16 finals no player even comes close to this. Ivan Lendl is second with 10 consecutive semifinal appearances.
Author Poll
I know what your thinking how can he be the greatest all-time and not be the greatest of his generation, the argument that Nadal will end up having a better career is very premature. Nadal has yet to show that he can dominate multiple majors, he has only two other major wins besides his French Open titles. Federer has won 5 straight U.S Opens along with the 5 straight Wimbledons.
I not going to discount Nadal's spell over Federer 13-7 lifetime against Federer, but remember this Nadal is four years younger and has caught Federer on the decline while Nadal is entering his prime. For some reason that gets overlooked.
I question how long can Nadal be great even at 23 he showing signs of wearing down, and his physical grind it out style will not make it any easier for him to stay healthy. Federer's durability has never been in question.
There was a time when Federer's mental toughness was a question because of how easily he was winning majors, many wondered how he would handle adversity. At the French Open he demonstrated that he can win even win he is not at his best. Last year despite struggling with his conditioning because of mononucleosis he salvaged his year win his fifth straight US Open and 3 grand-slam final appearances.
Every tennis fan should enjoy watching Federer because there may never be another one like him, his dominance from the baseline and combination of clutch serving and precise volleying sets him apart from anyone who has ever picked up a racket.
http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1...-the-best-ever
-
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/sport/news...ectid=10578296
Tennis: More to come from Swiss ace
4:00AM Sunday Jun 14, 2009
By Andrew Alderson
Tennis legend Rod Laver may have said it best about Roger Federer: "The best way to beat him would be to hit him over the head with a racquet."
While Rafael Nadal might argue with that, the quote did come to mind as Robin Soderling put his final forehand into the net at Roland Garros last week.
Federer dropped his knees into the clay and his head into his hands. He'd completed a record-equalling 14 Grand Slam titles, joint with Pete Sampras, and become just the sixth man to compile each of the four majors over the course of a career.
It's possible to drone on about Federer's numbers until your head resembles a Nasa scientist's white board, but let's save that for a quiz night.
Instead we talked to people who walked in the same rarefied atmosphere as Federer - and gained some insight from Federer's father, Robert.
The now 70-year-old Rod Laver is the only player to win two calendar year grand slams, once as an amateur in 1962 and again as a professional in 1969. He seems a sound starting point in our investigation.
"In the French Open final, Roger probably concentrated better than I've ever seen. His ground strokes were on the mark and his serve helped him win a lot of cheap points.
"His opponent was maybe tired or in awe of the situation but Roger played some of his best tennis in a while. He kept the ball deep, played long rallies, ran down a lot of shots and slipped a new forehand and backhand drop shot into his repertoire."
Fellow Australian Roy Emerson has also followed Federer's fortunes closely. He's the only career grand slammer in both men's singles and doubles.
The 72 year-old held the grand slam record with 12 singles titles, albeit in the amateur era, until Sampras took it over. He says Federer has eased a burden.
"Now he's a true champion. He wanted to win the French Open so badly that it put extra pressure on him because people were saying he wasn't a complete player until that point. And of course when anyone's playing Roger they're playing well because they've got nothing to lose."
Federer's father, a chemist by trade who works out of Bottmingen near Basel in Switzerland, agrees.
"When you look back over the last three or four years he was 'smelling it'. He was so close for quite some time. The French Open was always on his mind; the top of his list to win.
"We just had a consolation this year with Novak Djokovic and Rafael Nadal out early. All of a sudden Roger was the best rated player in the race and he saw he could win.
"But he worked hard for it, especially with those tough matches against Jose Acasuso, Tommy Haas and Juan Martin del Potro. It wasn't an easy waltz through."
Federer will now throw on his traditional v-neck white pullover and blazer as he challenges for a possible sixth Wimbledon crown. A tumultuous last week means he has opted out of his lead-up tournament in Halle, Germany.
Robert Federer says embracing English culture was a key in his son's rise to sporting renown.
"My wife Lynette is South African and she brought this anglophile sports approach into the family which I see as positive - it had a good influence on Roger. When he was young, we always went down to South Africa and became quite familiar with the culture. Roger had a rugby ball, he also played cricket with the boys - he knows his English sports, that's for sure."
But ask whether tennis saturates conversation around the family dinner table and Federer senior chuckles.
"Yes, there is a lot of talk about it. Lynette and I work at home for Roger managing the fan posts, the foundation stuff; all these things from all over the world make it to our table. But we do want to switch off the tennis occasionally and just be a normal family and talk about Roger and Mirka's (wife Miroslava Vavrinec) upcoming baby."
Father Federer says he and Lynette will be off to see their son compete at Wimbledon but he's not too fussed about going early on.
"I won't be there right at the start because it's too long sitting around for two weeks. We'll go at the end of the first week and stay until it's over."
Speaking of over, has Federer reached match point on whether he is the greatest player ever; and will it be decided by that first Sunday in July?
Laver is in little doubt about the result, where he will be in attendance as part of his Open era grand slam 40th anniversary.
"I think this particular championship will push him over the top. I'd be betting on him winning that's for sure. Nadal is tough, but he's got a sore knee. It may not be a big problem but it's something he's worrying about, so he mightn't get the practice he needs to win like last year."
Emerson agrees Nadal's form and fitness is the determining factor.
"It's the only thing holding him back. He relies on his mobility around the court to win. But I think Federer will do it, he's in good form, and grass suits his game so I think he'll break Sampras' record. He's also got more grand slams in him yet, don't worry."
Both past champions are reluctant to compare eras and muse about Federer's place in tennis history. It's a debate that can never be resolved, given the differences in technology and the blurring between amateur and professional ranks during their time. Still, you've got to throw it out there.
"Being the number one player in your era is one of the best things you can say about your game, a great attribute. Tennis is fortunate to have Roger for that reason alone," says a diplomatic Laver.
"It's a totally different game with the racquet technology. They've also moved a lot of the grass courts to hard courts. Roger should be able to compile more grand slams if he continues playing into his early 30s provided he can stay fit, focused and competitive week in, week out.
"He can't go having a holiday for six months though and expect to come back. Maybe years ago you could do that, but not now.
Emerson says it is hard to compare but Federer is "way up there" after his clay court triumph.
"It's still the same tournament in Paris but the style of play is different. They hit the ball so much harder from the baseline than we used to. Today's equipment also enables excessive top spin so it's incredible to watch."
So now the sporting world turns to what bookmakers tell us will be the afternoon of Sunday, July 5 in London postcode SW19.
Rod Laver might joke that the solution lies in connecting catgut with cranium but odds are the only thing going on Roger Federer's head will be a figurative crown.
The uncharted male territory of Grand Slam title number 15 is just seven victorious matches away.
-
Rocket Rod Laver still firing on all cylinders
A 70 year-old gentleman set the alarm at his California home for the crack of dawn last Sunday to enjoy a date with Roger Federer. If the Greatest Mark II was going to make history in the French Open final, Rod Laver, the Greatest Mark I, was determined not to miss a moment on television.
By Ian Chadband
Published: 7:27PM BST 12 Jun 2009
Living legend: Rod Laver says that he expects Roger Federer to go on to win "a lot more" than 14 grand slam titles before he retires from tennis.
"Yep, before 6am, not too early for me," enthuses the old maestro. "And I couldn't have been more thrilled for Roger, seeing him play so brilliantly. With no Rafael Nadal in the final, Roger would have said to himself, 'It will really be a failure if I don't win it now'.
"I think he's over the biggest hurdle in his tennis with the French under his belt. Pete Sampras, Boris Becker, John McEnroe, great players, never did. The monkey is off Roger's back and he'll play, not with abandon, but with excitement, enjoyment and freedom. He'll be Wimbledon champion again next month unless someone catches fire like Robin Soderling did against Nadal."
French Open 2009: Roger Federer defeats Robin Soderling to be crowned champion
If Federer does indeed regain his crown, Australia's living legend, still unmistakable with the freckles and birdy nose 40 years after the last of his own four triumphs, will be there to salute him. After being invited for his first visit to his favourite lawns for nearly a decade, nothing would give him more pleasure.
Because for all the arguments that have resurfaced again this week about whether Federer, with his record-equalling 14 grand slams, may now have surpassed him as the finest player in history, there is such a deep connection, forged by respect and admiration, between the pair that Laver feels any debate is redundant.
"You can be the dominant player of your time but you can't compare eras," he says. Still, he concedes, let's see what Federer's tally is by the time he has retired. "I have to believe it's going to be a lot more than 14. He's only 27; I played my last Slam in 1969 and I was 31."
But what about those two calendar year grand slams, spanning the amateur and Open eras in 1962 and 1969, which remain the twin monuments to Laver's supremacy, the main reasons why today he is still revered, like Muhammad Ali in boxing and Pele in football, as tennis's nonpareil?
No one has ever won all four in a year since that quadruple, which had Sports Illustrated noting in awe in the infancy of tennis's Open era: "The sport will have to be opened considerably wider, to include angels, highly-trained kangaroos or something as yet unenvisaged, before anyone else will be in Laver's league."
Andre Agassi calls Laver's slams a "God-like" achievement, never to be repeated. Only the freckled god himself begs to differ. "I certainly can see the Grand Slam being done again. I'm surprised it hasn't happened in 40 years but Federer's got to be odds on to pull it off if he clicks at the right time through the tournaments. It's very possible for him."
He believes that Federer's rejuvenation, ironically, stems from the depths of his despair this January in Melbourne's Rod Laver arena. "The Nadal defeat hurt him so much that he went away and took stock of his whole game," Laver said. "In Paris, you could see he's now learned the perfect drop shot for his repertoire. The backhand one he almost backs into the net is just incredible."
Laver sounds like a cross between keen student and fan; in an era when the crushing, ever harder-hitting baseline exchanges remind Laver of "ping pong", he thrills to the power and athleticism but adores the idea of any old-fashioned, subtle variety making a comeback.
Nadal's Wimbledon win over Federer last year was the greatest tennis he has ever seen but he is evidently worried for the champion. "Tendinitis? Nadal's going to have to just rest and get away from tennis and I'd be a little surprised if he plays because his career is more than playing at Wimbledon one year. He's defending the title and if he loses there that's not a good omen for his confidence."
In his heyday, Rodney George Laver, the 'Rockhampton Rocket', was a cross between Nadal and Federer; both artist, gentleman and murderous leftie in one slight package. He laughs about what was once the wonder of the sporting age, that monstrous left forearm, which could whip topspin bullets past opponents as never before.
"Atrophy has set in – it doesn't perform quite as it did then!" he chuckles. Tennis is not so much fun these days with arthritis in the wrist the "payback" for all those years of being the first Lord of Topspin. He'll still play the odd match with son Rick at the La Costa Country Club near his home in Carlsbad. Does he still pull a crowd? "Oh no. Just he and I – and maybe the odd person peering through the fence, laughing at us a little bit."
Marvelling, more like. Laver's greatness is such that he's bathed in myths. Was he really a sickly child? "I had jaundice at 15 and was out of commission for a bit, that's all." What about stuffing cabbage leaves under his comedy hat to cool him from the scorching Brisbane heat? No, just a "gimmicky thing" he once did.
Turns out even the nickname 'Rocket' was ironic. "Harry Hopman [the famed Australian Davis Cup captain] seemed to think I was pretty lackadaisical, always waiting to the last minute to get to the ball. Just like Ken Rosewall was called 'Muscles' because he didn't have any, I was the rocket man."
Despite his 43 years in America, Laver still seems like a classic, straight-talking Queenslander who would always prefer beer to Champagne and will not entertain bull. Ask him if he might, as many believe, have won another 10 grand slams if not for turning pro in his prime years, he shrugs: "I only worry about the ones I did win!".
He regrets nothing. That five-year period in the pro game testing himself against the best, like his idol Lew Hoad, hardened him into the player who returned to bestride Wimbledon again. The Nadal-Federer rivalry over 20 games? He and Rosewall played 185 times, of which Laver won 100. "And they're only the ones we kept score on!" said Laver with a laugh. "I never believed I'd get the chance to play Wimbledon again so I was just excited by the sheer thrill of getting back when tennis went open."
Even now, all those years after his last triumph over John Newcombe, the thrill of returning to Wimbledon in a couple of weeks still "overpowers" him. "It's the faraway dream I had when playing some kid in Brisbane. I'd look over the net and think, 'this is it, Wimbledon final, match point'."
He's looking forward to seeing a "matured" Andy Murray "have a really good run" this year but you sense that on Centre Court, perhaps under the closed roof he is so keen to see, he will be rooting for a kindred spirit, almost his natural heir.
"Someone like Federer just loves the game and respects his opponent; I like to think I was the same," he explains. "You're both out there trying to win but you just want to make sure you're representing all the past champions and the game of tennis too." With majesty and modesty, no one ever did it better than Laver.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/ten...cylinders.html
-
The Nation: Saluting Roger Federer
by Eyal Press
Switzerland's Roger Federer kisses his trophy
Roger Federer kisses his trophy after winning the French Open tennis tournament in Paris, FRANCE, Sunday June 7, 2009. The win solidified Federer's reputation as the best tennis player in the world.
In case you were too busy watching the Sunday morning news shows, Roger Federer won the French Open yesterday, tying Pete Sampras' record of fourteen career grand slams and solidifying his claim to being the greatest tennis player of all time. Federer's victory over Sweden's Robin Soderling was not an exciting affair – he won in straight sets, in a match that seemed decided from the opening game, when Federer broke Soderling's serve and marched out to a 4-0 lead. But it was a sublime display of his artistry. Playing against a fierce hitter who had defeated his previous opponents (including perhaps the greatest clay-court player ever, Rafael Nadal) by bludgeoning the ball, Federer countered with a game of spin and misdirection. He sliced sharp-angled backhands crosscourt to draw Soderling forward. He floated devilishly disguised drop shots just over the net in the middle of rallies. He kicked his serves into seemingly every corner of the service box, including four consecutive aces in a masterful second-straight tiebreaker that effectively ended the contest.
Federer is too poster-boy perfect for some sports fans: too nice, too gracious, too Swiss. But in an age of Olympic doping scandals and A-Rod, his career stands as a beautiful illustration of the limits of brute force. Federer's greatest legacy will not be the number of grand slams he ends up winning (though his astounding appearance in 20 straight slam semifinals will likely last for decades, a feat whose greatness was underscored by Nadal's early-round loss on the surface where he was supposedly unbeatable). It will be his role in rescuing men's tennis from the Nuclear Age it entered fifteen years ago, when the combination of improved training and advanced racket technology seemed to strip the game of all subtlety; when big serves and short rallies seemed to decide everything and fans who longed to see world-class players display touch and accuracy were left to watch ESPN classics of Borg vs. McEnroe.
Now more than ever, as he creeps toward 30 in a sport dominated by men in their young 20's, Federer must rely on misdirection and guile to defeat players who can overpower him. This is how he won the one grand slam that had eluded him until Sunday. David Foster Wallace evoked this aspect of his game in his brilliant homage to the Swiss star, "Federer As Religious Experience," which ended with a glance at the generation of Federer-inspired kids we'll be watching a few years from now, after he's retired:
You should have seen, on the grounds' outside courts, the variegated ballet that was this year's Junior Wimbledon. Drop volleys and mixed spins, off-speed serves, gambits planned three shots ahead — all as well as the standard-issue grunts and booming balls. Whether anything like a nascent Federer was here among these juniors can't be known, of course. Genius is not replicable. Inspiration, though, is contagious, and multiform — and even just to see, close up, power and aggression made vulnerable to beauty is to feel inspired and (in a fleeting, mortal way) reconciled.
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/s...ryId=105145212
-
ROGER FEDERER'S PLACE IN HISTORY
A grand master of the game
Bruce Jenkins, Chronicle Staff Writer
Monday, June 8, 2009
(06-07) 20:05 PDT -- As he stood alongside Roger Federer for a post-match interview at the French Open, John McEnroe wore a look of reverence. It's a look we've seen in recent years from Rod Laver, Bjorn Bjorg and Pete Sampras, as well as Andre Agassi during Sunday's trophy ceremony. They all stand in awe of the man who dismantled Robin Soderling 6-1, 7-6 (1), 6-4 to lodge a solid claim as the greatest player of all time.
Everything about Federer is perfection: his game, his lifestyle, his comportment. Addressing the crowd after his historic win, Federer breezily alternated between French and English, and he could have added two more languages - German and Swiss-German - if asked.
"I am so happy for you, man," Agassi told Federer, and you got the feeling that Rafael Nadal, wherever he might have been, felt the same. Few people in tennis, perhaps even Federer himself, envisioned him hoisting the French Open trophy so soon after a discouraging sequence of tournaments that transformed his image from unbeatable champion to sympathetic figure.
Now he stands in select company, joining Agassi, Laver, Don Budge, Fred Perry and Roy Emerson as the only men to have won each of the four majors, undeniable proof of multi-surface mastery. His 14th major title ties him with Sampras for the all-time record, and with Nadal on the mend from a knee injury, Federer could grab his 15th title as soon as the upcoming Wimbledon.
In the end, it won't matter that Nadal, upset by Soderling in the fourth round, wasn't there to confront Federer on Sunday. When Agassi scored his French Open breakthrough in 1999, it was Andrei Medvedev on the other side. Laver got a break during his 1962 Grand Slam season, drawing unseeded countryman Marty Mulligan in the Wimbledon final. It's not always a matchup for the ages, nor are such details relevant in the end.
Regrettably, for those who love "greatest ever" comparisons, tennis' lamentable political history stops every argument cold. Until 1968, professionals were not allowed to compete in the major tournaments, and you almost had to turn pro to make a decent living in the 1950s and '60s. For those who saw Pancho Gonzalez and Lew Hoad on the old pro circuit, that's where the "greatest ever" discussion begins.
Laver's case still carries massive weight, for he not only won the calendar Grand Slam as an amateur (1962) and a professional (1969), but he also missed five full years (1963-67) of Grand Slam competition because he was not allowed to compete. That would be ages 25 to 29 for Laver, his absolute prime, and many think he would have 18 to 20 major titles, not 11, if politics hadn't done so much damage to the sport.
Other complications cloud the picture. Laver played in an era when three of the four majors (all but the French) were played on grass. For many years, players bypassed the Australian Open because of the travel inconvenience (McEnroe played it only twice in his first 12 years on tour, Jimmy Connors twice in his life, Borg just once).
What separates Federer from everyone but Laver - and I haven't heard a single all-time great dispute this - is his total command of the game. McEnroe didn't have that kind of power, Connors that kind of touch, Sampras or Borg that kind of variety. Federer is a master of every conceivable shot, and no one, not even Nadal, can even imagine reaching 20 consecutive Grand Slam semifinals, or 15 out of 16 finals.
What everyone would like to see, I've found, is Laver playing Federer with today's equipment, each man at the age of 25, in a clay-grass-hardcourt sequence. So the debates rage, inconclusive but highly engaging.
Wrapping up the French Open on other fronts:
THE WOMEN'S GAME: The No. 1 player, Dinara Safina, is an emotional wreck who has been humiliated in each of her three Grand Slam finals. How is this even possible? Though the caliber of men's tennis seems to soar at every turn, the women's game is at an all-time low, made worse by the disturbing number of players shrieking like assault victims on every shot.
The NBC crew tried its best to talk up Saturday's Safina-Svetlana Kuznetsova final as something potentially special, but everyone knew that was a terrible matchup, the latest yawner between unwatchable, glued-to-the-baseline players with a history of choking. Credit Kuznetsova for a marvelous personal comeback, to the point where she truly believes in herself. But the WTA badly needs a solid, consistent player - so superbly personified by the retired Justine Henin - at the top.
"I miss her excellence," NBC's Mary Carillo said. "She was such a ferocious fighter, so well coached, so technically and tactically adept. When she showed up at tournaments, she was fit and there to win. You felt like you were in good hands watching her."
Serena Williams pulled her usual classless stunt after losing in the quarterfinals to Kuznetsova, saying, "I think I lost because of me and not because of anything she did." On occasion - the times when Serena scatters groundstrokes all over the place - this reflects a brutal honesty. This time she was just plain wrong. Serena had fought hard, and Kuznetsova played better when it mattered most. Outplayed, Serena. Get it right.
SHOT OF THE TOURNAMENT: Gael Monfils, in the third round against Jurgen Melzer. Monfils not only reached the ball at full extension of his all-out dive, but he also snapped an effective backhand that perpetuated a rally he eventually won. Said Jim Courier, "Monfils is probably the best raw athlete tennis has ever had."
DROPPING THE BALL: Dutifully protecting "The Today Show" and "Days of Our Lives," NBC negotiated a ridiculously narrow window (10 a.m. to 1 p.m. on both coasts) for tape-delayed coverage of the men's semifinals. With the goal of showing one match in its entirety, and frustrated by the fact that Federer-Juan Martin Del Potro was scheduled second, NBC opted for Soderling-Fernando Gonzalez. Result: Not one moment of Federer's historically significant match was shown, live or on tape. NBC has the best broadcasting team in all of sports (Carillo, McEnroe and Ted Robinson), but please, either cover the tournament or give it to someone else.
Grand Slammers
Men who have won the French Open, Wimbledon, U.S. Open and Australian Open major championships:
Roger Federer, Andre Agassi, Roy Emerson, Rod Laver*, Don Budge*, Fred Perry
* - won Grand Slam in a single calendar year
Note: Nine women, most recently Serena Williams, have won career Grand Slams
Most majors, men
Roger Federer 14
Pete Sampras, above14
Roy Emerson 12
Bjorn Borg 11
Rod Laver 11
Women
Margaret Court Smith 24
Steffi Graf 22
Helen Wills Moody 19
E-mail Bruce Jenkins at bjenkins@sfchronicle.com.
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/articl...SP2J182E19.DTL
-
-
Roger Federer's Grass Is Greener: Wimbledon 2009 Preview
Last week as I recuperated, drumming my fingers and watching the daily news about the grass court tournaments in progress—those warm-up tournaments for Wimbledon—I felt the major drama of the week eliminated once Rafael Nadal withdrew from Queens and Roger Federer withdrew from Gerry Weber.
For a while it looked as though there might be a promising final at Queens when it appeared that Andy Roddick would challenge Andy Murray. But, then, Roddick twisted his ankle and had to surrender to James Blake.
The match between Andy Murray and James Blake was not a real contest. Not many suspected it would be.
The upset of the week, however, was the one where Hollywood Tommy Haas upset Novak Djokovic in the final of Gerry Weber to take his first championship in a long while—since 2007 in Memphis.
Although, when you consider the match Haas played in the fourth round against Roger Federer at the French Open, perhaps it is not quite as shocking as might appear at first glance. Haas was playing some pretty astute tennis at Roland Garros and hasn't let up since then.
This week’s grass court tournaments look equally tepid.
At the Ordina Open in the Netherlands, the Spanish lads have the top three seeds with Fernando Verdasco, Tommy Robredo and David Ferrer as one, two and three respectively. David Ferrer is the defending champion on grass!
At Eastbourne where Igor Andreev, Dmitry Tursunov and Paul Henri Mathieu are the top three seeds, Mathieu has already been upset. We expect surprise finalists in this one.
Grass, which used to be the only surface in tennis, has now been relegated to five short weeks during the year, from the end of the French Open in early June through the first week in July. The season is ridiculously short.
Grass courts are the most expensive to cultivate and sustain—hard courts being the easiest to maintain once the initial court is poured.
The proud tradition of grass is upheld annually at Wimbledon which most would accede as the most prestigious of the slam tournaments. Breakfast at Wimbledon has become a tradition for American tennis fans.
It begins in one week.
It marks the third grand slam of the season with Rafael Nadal usurping Federer in Melbourne on hard courts and Federer supplanting Nadal on the red clay of Stade Roland Garros.
It makes you wonder what surprises are in store during this year of upsets and surprises.
We are still waiting to learn the fate of Nadal’s knees. Will he be able to defend his title?
We suspect Nadal will offer a defense but fall short at Wimbledon in 2009, eventually losing his No. 1 ranking before the U.S. Open tournament in late summer.
Will Roger Federer regain his crown?
His chances of capturing the Wimbledon Championship seem greater than Rafa’s of repeating, given Nadal’s knees and his lack of preparation.
Will Roger be sufficiently motivated to capture number 15 here or will he still be suffering a giddy hangover after the French Open victory?
Roger must sober up quickly because the window of opportunity can close quickly and without warning.
While Murray captured his first grass championship at Queens, he was offered little resistance along the way. Murray’s Wimbledon grass feat may be a year off but his grass game promises to mature and become awesome in the coming years.
In terms of Murray—2009 would be a perfect time to capture that sixth Wimbledon title for Federer because in upcoming years, Murray will become the force to be overcome in Wimbledon finals.
Novak Djokovic lost his final at Halle to journeyman Tommy Haas. Last year Djokovic lost early to Marat Safin, who went on to enjoy a fine run at Wimbledon until meeting Federer.
Djokovic’s problem is consistency. Yes, he has the game to defeat anyone. But, he often slumps on his way to the finals and loses unexpectedly when he should not.
That could change at any moment, as we know. But so far, Djokovic has given no indication that he has found his much needed consistency.
So this year we must stick with Federer as the preeminent favorite to capture the Wimbledon championship in 2009. Obviously his motivation to do so must be supreme.
A wise man knows and takes advantage of the opportunities that are given to him. Hopefully Federer will surmise the landscape and the future potential of his opposition, striking now when the iron is hot.
All right. Perhaps this is a bit of wishful thinking. Maybe an overdose of pain medication has given rise to a faulty premise. But I think not.
The victory at the French Open has freed Roger from a long held doubt and given him that confidence he needed to button down his game.
He overcame the worrisome windmills and bested their mythical champion. Indirectly, yes. But sufficiently.
While we suffer through another week of meaningless tournaments waiting, we mull over the possible scenarios and the possible winners. Once the draws are announced on June 19, then we can begin the task of prediction in earnest.
I'm looking forward to it.
http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1...n-2009-preview
-
-
Wimbledon varudhu - Murray or Nadal or anyone other than Federer is going to win...
