End of day 5th July, 2009: 15 Grand Slam titles to Roger Federer.
A momentous feat accomplished in half the time that Pete Sampras took to his path to greatness. This raises a few important questions. Is Federer the greatest player to have ever lived? Or, would he have been so successful if he had played in the times of Sampras-Agassi or Edberg-Cash-Becker or McEnroe-Borg, at their peak.
At every point in time, the human race has produced men of more or less equal capabilities. Men thrown in to the open field in a battle of the survival of the fittest. And often, one emerges conqueror and the others, the vanquished. It was the same when Federer arrived on the scene. A man from Switzerland trying to find his place in the world of an aging Sampras and a struggling Agassi. Federer had an incisive serve that he could depend on to clinch the game from 0-40 down. A powerful forehand that could create miraculous angles, straight out of a trigonometry book. The smoothest backhand, that sometimes resembled a scud missile and sometimes, a beguiling frisbee. And Federer simply had more time than anyone to play a shot. Call it time management or space management; he was a master of all four dimensions.
A cricket coach once said, “People like Sachin Tendulkar because he makes the game look easy. Look at every shot, the way he plays. Simply effortless. You believe even you could play the shot that easily.” Such is Federer’s approach towards the game and his dominance over his contemporaries. For every greatest player, there is a second greatest, who is made, and who springs up working on the weakness of the former. Sampras’ drawbacks made Agassi. A faltering Graf made Seles. Microsoft made Linux. If Federer has no equal competition, it’s because he chose not to create one. Perfecting his game with every match, he has reduced opponents to insignificance, ruined their tennis careers and nipped many potential greats in the bud.
Or if you think Nadal is the One, the ideal challenger, let’s see if he can be keep up his fitness to play Federer over a consistent period of time.
Over the last 7 or 8 years, Federer has cast such a spell that the memory of any other contemporary player almost ceases to exist, barring a few. There is an aura about him that makes his opponents almost willingly and happily surrender, sometimes much before the match. But, every sport is watched for entertainment. It has to offer the obvious drama that appeals to the masses. And perfection, most often, doesn’t provide it.
When Muhammed Ali, the heavyweight boxing champion, knocked out his opponent in a couple of minutes, the spectators, having paid a few thousand dollars for the ticket, felt cheated. A few thousand dollars only for a few minutes? How dare he win so easily? They needed more drama.
When Federer wraps up a match in straight sets, and that too without any animated display of emotions, the audience finds it lacking in entertainment. If Federer conquers the court with effortless ease, it’s no fault of the man. If the masses fail to appreciate the hard work and brilliance behind every shot, and still demand ostentatious drama, they have WWE to watch.
So, is Federer the greatest player to have ever played the sport? How long will the Federer Era last? We’ll only be able to tell after a few years. In retrospect.