New York Daily News
http://www.nydailynews.com/
Monday, June 8th 2009, 4:00 AM
There will be those who say that Roger Federer didn't have to go through Rafa Nadal to get to the French Open trophy Sunday in Paris, and all that will be is point-missing. Guess what? Tiger Woods has never had a Nadal in his life since the day he started winning majors, and nobody ever asks him to apologize for anything.
Stockman/Getty
Roger Federer realizes quest is finally over and French Open is finally his.
The last major Woods won was against Rocco Mediate. It was one of the great stories because he did it playing on one good leg, and in the end, as gracious and charming an opponent as Mediate was, this was about Woods' greatness, and his grace, and his athletic character. And so it is with Federer, now that he has finally won the French, now that he has finally completed the career Grand Slam, now that he has tied Pete Sampras at 14 majors.
"Now the question is: Am I the greatest of all time?" Federer said when it was over yesterday. "We don't know, but I definitely have many things going for me ..."
He does. This was big stuff Sunday in Paris, even if the final was played against Robin Soderling, who did something at the French that Federer never did and might never do: Beat Nadal. It was big stuff in sports because Federer is as big a player as his sport has ever produced. Whether he has lost six big finals to Nadal or not.
I was at Wimbledon last summer, the Wimbledon that would end with the best tennis match ever played anywhere, between Federer and Nadal. You could see even in the first week that Nadal was better than he ever was on grass and that Federer was not the same player he had been, even going for six Wimbledons in a row.
His confidence was not the same, his forehand was not as reliable (it would be forehand errors that finally cost him six Wimbledons in a row) as it had been. At the time it seemed like some kind of perfect storm: Federer was a little older, his strokes weren't as sure and neither was he, because here came this kid with Nadal.
Federer got to No. 13 at the Open, not having to beat Nadal there, beating Andy Murray in the final. But when he lost to Nadal in the Australian final, you started to wonder what it would take for him to catch Sampras. And before Nadal came along, all it took to make Federer the favorite to win a major was to get his application in on time.
Only now Soderling does him maybe the biggest favor in all of tennis history by upsetting Nadal. And you know something? If anybody ever deserved a break like that, it is Federer, who by making all those finals against Nadal came closer to winning the French Open than Pete Sampras ever did.
So now he is tied with Pete. As always there are three men's players to talk about when you try to decide the greatest player of all: Federer, Sampras, Rod Laver. Laver doesn't have the majors that Federer and Sampras do, but he wasn't allowed to play the majors for more than five years after he won the Grand Slam in 1962. When the sport finally became "Open," all Laver did was come back and win the Grand Slam again in 1969.
Roger Federer returns a ball to Robin Soderling during their French Open tennis men's final match on June 7, 2009 at Roland Garros Stadium in Paris. (BERTRAND GUAY/AFP/Getty Images)
He also never faced the kind of clay court specialists that Sampras did and Federer does. Laver still won two Slams, seven years apart, one of the amazing sports achievements of all time. But so is this: Federer making 20 major semis in a row. It is as likely as anybody will do that again as it is that another Laver will come along to win two Grand Slams.
Sampras went up against Andre Agassi when both of them were at their best. But I think Nadal will end up winning more majors than Agassi did.
There are all sorts of layers to this conversation, one of the best of its kind you could have in sports. Here are the guys Laver beat to win his Grand Slam titles: Ken Rosewall, Roy Emerson, Neale Fraser, John Newcombe, Tony Roche, Marty Mulligan, Andres Gimeno, Chuck McKinley.
There is no right answer here, except for this one: No one has ever had more game than Federer does, nobody ever had more shots, nobody ever had more talent and grace for hitting a tennis ball.
Of course when it was time for Federer to accept the trophy he was as fluent on the podium in French as he was in English. His game has always had the kind of fluency as he has gone from surface to surface, year after year.
He didn't have to beat Nadal yesterday. There is no rule passed in sports, especially for immortals, that they have to beat the other top guy to make history. What you do is show up and play who you play.
Federer has done that for a long time. He shows up for every major, every year, he takes on all comers, no matter what, then he makes the semis at least. On all surfaces. A lot of guys have had the chance to make 20 major semis in a row, win 14 majors, get a career Slam. Roger Federer has done all that. Now he finally has the French. Try telling him he's not the best who ever played.
No comments:
Post a Comment