- Video
-
Club Roar
Captured a great grassroots sporting moment? We want to see it!Content Collections
The Roar Community
- Join
- Login
In the early 1990s, a prime Steffi Graf had to rough it out with Monica Seles. Had it not been for the stabbing incident, Seles would have gone on to dominate the sport as her game was still evolving back then and she was entering her prime years.
A little more than a decade later we saw a similar rivalry taking shape – this time between two men, Roger Federer and Rafael Nadal.
Pete Sampras barely retired after winning his the US Open in 2002 when there was a talk of this wonder – Roger Federer, who the pandits declared as the best in the history of the game.
What more could you say with the kind of elegance he brought into the game, especially considering Sampras and his contemporaries were boring.
It was all about who hit the hardest serve. But here was a different type of player; a throwback to the ages whose endless range of shots was simply mind-blowing.
Opponent after opponent were blown away, and it wasn’t that the opposition was in any way inferior. Federer’s other worldly talent left players like Roddick, Hewitt and Safin mesmerised.
These players in any other era would have won more slams. It just looked like Federer would go on winning many more and dominate for years.
However, this was to be short-lived. The mid 2000s saw the emergence of a muscular man, wearing clam digger pants and sleeveless shirts, his long hair tied by a bandana.
Rafael Nadal was an accomplished clay-courter, but clay was not where Federer and Nadal met for the first time. It was the hard courts of America back in 2004, when few had even even heard of Nadal.
Yet he beat the numero uno in straight sets, displaying great attacking skills. The final score was 6-3, 6-3 in favour of Nadal. The pair would meet again the next year and again Federer found the going tough winning from two sets down, the only time he did so against Nadal, winning 2-6, 6-7, 7-6, 6-3, 6-1.
The seeds of doubt had been planted. Federer would never again have it easy. The writing was clear. The rival had come at last, and what a rival he would shape out to be.
Beginning with clay courts, he improved upon his skills and closed in on the grass in London. These two would face each other in six finals over three years at the French Open and Wimbledon.
Federer could never beat him at the French, going from bad to worse in his three finals there in losing 1-6, 6-1, 6-4, 7-6 (2006), 6-3, 4-6, 6-3, 6-4 (2007), and 6-1, 6-3, 6-0 (2008).
Nadal was initially worsted at the lawns of Wimbledon in 2006 (Federer winning 6-0,7-6,6-7,6-3), then narrowed the gap in the subsequent encounter (Federer again won 7-6,4-6,7-6,2-6,6-2) before finally taking over as the champion in what was the greatest of finals in the year 2008. The final score was 6-4,6-4,6-7,6-7,9-7 in favour of Nadal.
The mantle had passed and it was reaffirmed a few months later at the 2009 Australian Open. Nadal was the victor once again in five sets, and this after a long and exhausting semi-final encounter encounter with Verdasco. A well-rested Federer was beaten 7-5, 3-6, 7-6, 3-6, 6-2 in the final, leaving him shattered and in tears.
Nadal’s absence for the rest of the year would help Federer regain the No.1 spot, with victories including his lone French Open (over Robin Soderling, the only player to beat Nadal at the French) and another Wimbledon title, where he won a classic final encounter with Andy Roddick by a wafer-thin margin of 5-7, 7-6, 7-6, 3-6, 16-14.
In the early 1990s, Steffi Graf had it easy. Her deadly rival was gone and she could bulldoze her way to more Grand Slams and trophies against an ageing Martina Navratilova, a washed out Gabriela Sabatini, a not so confident Jana Novotna, and Arantxa Sanchez.
The tears that flowed from Federer’s eyes would have been the same for Graf had Seles not been stabbed.
Federer, however, had to face stiffer opposition to add to his tally. In the latter half of his career he’s had to contend not only with Nadal, but also with Novak Djokovic, Andrew Murray and Juan Martin Del Potro, other champions of repute.
Federer has done a commendable job to increase his tally of slams to 17 (the highest in the world as of now), winning everything in the process.
Pete Sampras never came close to wresting the trophy on the red clay, let alone winning it. He never even reached the final in Paris, with his best finish a straight sets semi-final defeat to Yevgeny Kafelnikov.
The main rival to Sampras throughout his career was an inconsistent Andre Agassi, who was often clueless against him at the faster courts in Wimbledon and the US Open.
Boris Becker, Stefan Edberg and Ivan Lendl were finished, while Jim Courier was burnt out by 1993 – the year Sampras began his dominance.
Others like Goran Ivanisevic, Patrick Rafter, Michael Stich and Richard Krajicek were far too inconsistent to challenge Sampras on a regular basis.
It is sadly on the records that Nadal has Federer’s number and has got the better of him on most occasions, including the most crucial encounters.
Still, greatness cannot be measured just by the fact of the wins in head-to-head encounters. Even Nadal himself has dismissed the talks of him being greater than Federer, arguing that people who say so don’t know tennis.
Federer’s greatness also lies in the fact that he never walked away from the game, like Bjorn Borg did when faced by the genius John McEnroe. Instead, he kept on fighting and continued honing his skills.
Greatest or not, there is no denying the fact that in terms of consistency, shot making, talent and the simple creativity of shot selection, we see a craftsman creating a piece of art when we watch Federer play his matches.
The skill set that he has brought to the game of tennis is what makes him great. Whether he’s the greatest or not is up to the viewer. The debate can go on.
Whether it’s aces or races, try out Aussie bookmaker PlayUp for great odds and a great punting experience. Chances are you’re about to lose. Set a deposit limit.