The artist formerly known as Roger Federer
Roar Guru
By David Wiseman, 23 Apr 2009 David Wiseman is a Roar Guru
- Tagged:
- Rafael Nadal, Roger Federer, Tennis
There is no doubt that Roger Federer is not the dominant force he once was. He is still competitive and one hell of a player, but he is not the omni-force of days gone past. He used to collect trophies like people do Facebook friends. It made huge news if he didn’t win the tournament.
Now the sun is beginning to set on his incredible career.
The reason he is being judged so harshly is due to the ridiculous height at which he set the bar. In 2005-06, he put together a record of 173-9, winning 23 tournaments, of which five were Grand Slams.
It was a travesty of the highest order that Federer didn’t win Sports Illustrated Sportsman of the Year award. In 2006 they gave it to Dwyane Wade, which is blatantly unjust given how much controversy there was about the Miami Heat’s championship.
In 2006, Federer won three Slams and was runner up in the fourth. He entered 17 tournaments and appeared in 16 finals.
Last year, he won four tournaments, including the US Open and Olympic gold. Not bad for a down season.
Federer has advanced to the semi-finals in every Grand Slam he has played at since the 2004 Wimbledon.
This level of consistency over the span of 19 Grand Slams simply isn’t normal. The previous record was ten, which Ivan Lendl accomplished in the mid to late 1980s.
Federer has opened 2009 with an 18-5 record.
He was runner-up in the Australian Open, but has since struggled. His motivation isn’t the same. He has got married and he has a child on the way.
He would know more than anyone that as every day passes, he is one more day removed from his wonder years. He would look across the net and, in Rafael Nadal, see the Roger Federer he once saw in the mirror five years ago – lean, hungry and incredibly motivated.
The big question is if he can equal Sampras’ fourteen Grand Slam single titles and then overtake it.
Currently, he sits on thirteen.
It is going to become harder and harder for him to win seven matches in a row. But Wimbledon and the US Open are his best chances.
It has been a privilege to watch him.
He has been an athlete of the highest order, who put tennis on the pedestal it deserves.
Enjoy sports? Enjoy a bargain? All Sports Online has your favourite sporting brands at up to 70% off. Online only, premium quality sporting goods and merchandise at discounted prices. Get a deal now.
Do you have what it takes to become a sports writer? Write for the roar
Other Sports articles
- Victoria Azarenka vs Maria Sharapova: Australian Open women’s final live scores, blog (89)
- The sporting fallacy of the Olympic ‘Games’ (46)
- Sonny Bill needs to start boxing full time (46)
- Djokovic vs Nadal was great, but do we need six-hour finals? (36)
- Sonny Bill looking sharp for his first real test (29)
- Sonny Bill wins title in first round (25)
- Nadal vs Djokovic: The match for the ages (20)
- London’s Olympic Games have a long way to come (10)
- New champ Williams looking to next fight (5)
- Aust and GB aim to convert 4ths to bronze
- Young pitcher signs big deal with Red Sox (7)
- World Cup Darts heartbreak in Hamburg (3)
- Mayweather and Pacquiao have shamed boxing (13)
- Will Tom Brady’s legacy be affected by one drop? (20)
- London’s Olympic Games have a long way to come (10)
- World Cup Darts heartbreak in Hamburg (3)
- Mayweather and Pacquiao have shamed boxing (13)
- Will Tom Brady’s legacy be affected by one drop? (20)
- Sonny Bill needs to start boxing full time (46)
- Lachlan Murdoch squashing FTA sport for Fox’s benefit (4)
- Sonny Bill Williams vs Clarence Tillman III: Live updates, blog [video] (182)
- Explore:
- Rafael Nadal, Roger Federer, Tennis
Kazama said | April 23rd 2009 @ 8:23am | Report comment
David, I have been and still am a big fan of Roger Federer but I have to agree with you. It looks like his career is going to end very soon if he can’t start winning tournaments – and not just Grand Slams – again. It is a shame because I really wanted to see him win all four majors but as long as Rafa is fit he’s not going to get anywhere near Roland Garros. In fact he may never win a Slam again, thanks to both the rise of Rafa (on grass and hard courts), Novak and Murray. It would be a real shame that a guy with such incredible talent would fall just one Slam short of equalling Pistol Pete’s record, but that’s how it looks to me right now.
It actually seems more likely now that Rafa will win the four Majors – in fact I think he’ll do it this year.
Nonetheless I’ll keep supporting Roger until the end, hoping that he can recover his form soon and win at least one more major before he decides to hang up the racket for good and settle down with his family.
Greg Russell said | April 23rd 2009 @ 1:06pm | Report comment
I agree that Fed is cooked, in fact I have been saying this the second half of 2007, which is when he started losing in early rounds of Masters events, etc. It’s true that he banked some big wins even in the second half of 2007 (Wimbledon, US Open, year-end Masters), but he seemed to be doing this more on his name than his actual form. In view of this he did remarkably well to win the 2008 US Open, and who knows if there will be another win at a grand slam? One would have to think that Wimbledon is his only chance, because Nadal is still the only player to beat him on grass, and somehow one still cannot be convinced that Nadal will be a regular champion on grass – does he really have the game? In principle Murray should also turn into a force on grass, but the pressure of the British on their own at Wimbledon is something that none of us can imagine. On clay I think it will take a miracle for Fed to notch his desperately desired grand slam, while too many players seem to have his measure on hardcourt now (Nadal, Murray, Djokovic).
I think one needs to remember that four years as a dominant no. 1, what Fed has achieved, seems to be about the historical limit in men’s tennis. I know that Sampras was year-end no. 1 for 6 years in a row, but one needs to remember that for the last 2 years of this period he was sustained only by Wimbledon wins. One also should remember that Agassi, the player who might have been Nadal to Samrpas’s Federer, went walkabout for much of the period that Sampras was on top. So Fed’s decline is in accord with historical patterns.
Which brings me to Nadal. He is well and truly tracking to be the greatest player of his type since Borg, perhaps even better. Without him Federer may already be on 18 grand slam titles (13 won plus 5 losses to Nadal in finals). Perhaps Federer was a bit lucky in starting his era of dominance when there were only relatively weak (Hewitt, Roddick) or inconsistent (Safin) opponents to deal with, but certainly he has ended it by having to confront someone else who is destined to be an all-time great.
Brian said | April 23rd 2009 @ 1:39pm | Report comment
I really hope Fed has at least one more in him as he is such a better champion than Sampras. He has made 3 French Open Finals whereas I dont think Sampras made one. What Fed should do is enjoy his new marriage, get his body right, skip the clay courts and start practising on grass now
Benjamin Conkey said | April 24th 2009 @ 2:53pm | Report comment
I don’t think he’s slipped, I just think the competition has improved. He matches up against Nadal alright on most surfaces. I mean how close did he go to winning both the Australian Open and Wimbledon? It’s just that unique clay in France. Nadal gets so much more spin off the surface at Roland Garros, and Fed can’t handle it.
Unfortunately for Federer it’s going to be a painful process..because those lead-up clay tournaments give him a false sense of security, as do the early rounds at the French.
At least Federer now knows how frustrating it must have been for Andy Roddick playing against him.
Sam said | April 24th 2009 @ 3:00pm | Report comment
Big mistake getting married. Look what has happened to Hewitt. He should have got the record and then got married
Derryn said | April 26th 2009 @ 8:20pm | Report comment
Don’t think it matters if Federer passes the record as Nadal will pass it by a long way.
Great to watch Fed at his best, but when the matches get tight he gets tight.
Greg Russell said | April 27th 2009 @ 9:49am | Report comment
A further comment about Federer is that he has only lost one match on grass since being eliminated in the first round of 2002 Wimbledon by Mario Ancic. That of course was the loss to Nadal in the epic 2008 final. Between these losses there were a record 65 consecutive wins on grass.
So while it is very clear that several players now have Federer’s measure on clay and hardcourt, there is as yet no evidence of similar problems on grass. This confirms that Wimbledon is Fed’s best chance of equalling and surpassing Sampras’s record of 14 grand slam titles. We should not dismiss his chances until we see what the 2009 grass-court season brings. After all, Sampras continued to win at Wimbledon after his supremacy on other surfaces faded.
rafaeldavid said | May 10th 2009 @ 11:57pm | Report comment
Everybody knows you dislike Brad Gilbert, but look at what he’s done for Roddick, Agassi and Murray. I wonder if you can discard this dislike and hire him as your coach. He will do wonders for your game – guaranteed! If anybody close to Roger, please this along
ohtani's jacket said | May 19th 2009 @ 12:00am | Report comment
I suppose if Federer couldn’t beat Nadal under those circumstances, he was never going to beat him again, but still that was a huge win.
stevo said | June 15th 2009 @ 1:25pm | Report comment
haha. oh yeah sure. roger is right out of it guys. he has won 2 of his last 3 grand slams but your right his career is going down the drains. *sarcasim* . the only person he doesnt beat almost every time they play is rafael nadal. look what he did to soderling! thats his 9th win in a row against him. his career is far from done. just because he looses a few tournaments because he was sick and needed to get back to his orignal form doesnt mean anything.