Vcore89
Talk Tennis Guru
Off court
The Battle for the Top Spot
- Marco Falbo, Journalist
03.10.2013 The eternal question as to whether Roger Federer is the best player in the history of tennis is even tougher to answer following Rafael Nadal's latest wins. The Majorcan player's success has brought new life to the rivalry with Basel's tennis star – and to his victories.
It was clear to former Wimbledon champion Michael Stich, when he spoke to Credit Suisse two years ago at the Zurich Open: "Pete Sampras had tougher opponents during his career than Roger, and a harder time winning the major tournaments." Many would agree with Stich, who was once also a major rival of Sampras. The carefree manner in which Federer raced from one trophy to another in his best years would be attributed by some people to, shall we say, lukewarm competition. Didn't other world champions have a tougher time of it?
Did Laver, Borg and Sampras have a tougher time?
Didn't Rod Laver, the only player to win all Grand Slam titles twice (1962 and 1969), have to do battle with Roy Emerson, John Newcombe, and Ken Rosewall? Didn't Björn Borg and John McEnroe have to face off against their fierce opponents Jimmy Connors and then Ivan Lendl? Didn't Lendl have to prove his worth against such stars as Boris Becker, Stefan Edberg, and Mats Wilander? Didn't Sampras also have his share of strong opponents? After all, he grew up amidst a strong US generation with Andre Agassi, Jim Courier, and Michael Chang. Yet Sampras, with 14 Grand Slam titles, ranks second on the list of top players, well behind Federer (17) and just ahead of Rafael Nadal, who already earned his 13th trophy at the last US Open.
Leaving the competition in the shadows
This point of view is not without fault. Just because Federer made all his competitors look bad before the much younger Rafael Nadal, Novak Djokovic, and Andy Murray began to catch up to him, it doesn't necessarily mean that they weren't talented. If Federer hadn't left them in the shadows time and time again, the careers of Lleyton Hewitt, Andy Roddick, and Marat Safin would shine much more brightly today. No one else in modern tennis has dominated to the extent that Federer did from 2004 to 2009. Basel's tennis star missed only four of 20 Grand Slam finals in those five years, winning 14 trophies.
Tough to compare performance
Tennis performance cannot be measured in objective terms such as time, distance, or height. For this reason, other factors must be considered if we are to compare players from various decades – such as the number of Grand Slam titles. However, we shouldn't forget that the Melbourne tournament was once less significant and was passed over by many, or that Laver did not play in any Grand Slams during some of his best professional years (1963 to 67). Many of the major rivalries in years past seem less important and of a shorter duration when we take a closer look. Borg and McEnroe went head-to-head just 14 times; Sampras and Agassi played against each other in five Grand Slam finals – but the rivalry between Federer and Nadal is now approaching ten years and has included eight Grand Slam finals. It seems logical that many of the old tennis greats had less of a grip on their competitors than memory suggests. Moreover, most of them had difficulties at some point, such as many of the Americans in Paris (McEnroe, Connors, Sampras), Borg at the US Open, Lendl at Wimbledon, etc.
Federer stood up to multiple generations
In Federer's favor, he has played against opponents from at least four generations over the course of his career and beaten them on all surfaces, except for one (Nadal on clay). As an outsider, he won his single, legendary match against Sampras at Wimbledon in 2001. He lost 0-3 against Agassi in his early years before winning the next eight matches. The most memorable was the final of the 2005 US Open, after which Agassi voiced some unforgettable compliments. "I think Roger is the best I've played against. There's nowhere to go. With other guys there is a safety zone, there's a place to get to. Against Roger anything you try to do, he has the answer. He can hurt you at any point. Playing against him is the biggest challenge."
More than 20 Grand Slam titles if not for Nadal?
While Federer has not had a very tough time with the latest generation, such as Milos Raonic, Bernard Tomic, and Grigor Dimitrov, he met an opponent early on who would become a stumbling block in his career and now seems keen to become the best player in the history of tennis himself: Rafael Nadal. From the start, the Spaniard was his equal in terms of playing style – a lightning-fast left hander with a lot of topspin – and dominant on clay, as previously mentioned. Federer lost four finals and a semi-final against Nadal, who is five years younger, in Paris alone, plus a final each in Melbourne and Wimbledon, although he at least defeated him twice in Grand Slam finals (Wimbledon 2006/07). In other words, without Nadal, Federer would have not 17, but probably 20 or more major trophies in his cabinet.
Nadal quickly closing the gap
In light of his performance this summer, even many of Federer's biggest fans are doubting that he will ever get to 20. After all, he is already 32 and has gradually slipped to number 7. Nadal, for his part, is winning at a rate that even he wouldn't have imagined after taking seven months off to heal from an injury. After his victories in Paris and at the US Open, he has just four fewer major titles than Federer, who once led 10-2 and 16-6. While the Swiss champion has won just one trophy in the last four years (Wimbledon 2012), Nadal has been a champion five times in that same period. Their duel has been suspended because Federer has recently been unable to stop Nadal. He lost all three matches this season (in Indian Wells, Rome, and Cincinnati) and has fallen behind 10-21 in their head-to-head record. At the US Open, Federer missed the long-anticipated first duel in New York with a fourth-round loss to Tommy Robredo, who won just four games in the quarter-final against Nadal, the eventual champion.
Rivalry of epic proportions
It's also clear to the New York Times that the Nadal vs. Federer duel has moved to a new level: Instead of direct matches, the number of Grand Slam titles will be more and more important. "The rivalry will thrive no matter what Federer does from here on. It will in certain respects be bigger than ever. It will have a very good case as the greatest in the history of men’s tennis," wrote Times columnist Harvey Araton. This is also obvious to Federer, who is now on the defensive. It's still in his power to change the course of things. It could be one of his last great missions: to fight his way back and try to stop his eternal rival once again on his own terms. With the legends of tennis history looking over his shoulder.
