High on the hills was a lonely GOAT

Only one man could bring me out of blogging semi-retirement: the Rajah himself.

The story arc of Roger Federer's resurgence has been written many times over by multiple authors around the world and I will not repeat it here. A cursory Google search will suffice. Instead I want to put down some random, disjointed thoughts that float through my brain...

a) For a long time DH and I were reconciled to the fact that he'd be stuck on one prime number - 17. When he won #18 earlier this year in Australia, DH remarked that he would HAVE to win one more to get back to a prime number because that's where he should be (by himself and one). Well, what do you know? It may be time to start thinking of 23 now. Impossible? Well, many of us thought 18 was impossible.

b) Remember this commercial from 10 years ago? It was released on July 6th, 2007, just moments after Roger had won his 10th major and was narrated by Tiger Woods who ended it with the haunting words: My name is Tiger Woods. I have 12 majors and counting. So keep up, buddy.

Yesterday, Roger did what Tiger always dreamed of - overtaking Jack Nicklaus' major count (18). For the record, Tiger has stalled at 14 for over eight years and it does not appear he is going to add to that total.



c) The Federer of 2017 is winning because he is better than the Federer of a few years ago. He is winning because he has improved. His backhand, especially, is a lot flatter and more potent. the elegant top-spin laden one has been beefed up by another version - a flattened, whiplash of a shot that singes across the court with power that is approaching Wawrinka territory.

d) The 2017 Wimbledon final was, finally, lacking in excitement or prolonged tension for Federer. But I am not complaining one bit. I'll take that any day over the 5 set gut-wrencher from earlier this year at the Australian Open where he was (gasp!) trailing 1-3 in the fifth set. Even today I sometimes break into a cold sweat thinking about what might have happened had Roger not raised his game.

Imagine this - Nadal wins the Australian Open. Suddenly the major head-to-head is 17-15 in Roger's favor with the French Open coming up where Nadal would make it 17-16. Oh dear...the GOAT narrative would have taken a drastic turn for the worse for us FedFans. Phew! Thank heavens for that atomic backhand (and Robin Soderling).

e) The loss to Juan Martin del Potro at the 2009 US Open stung for a long, long time. Then came the capitulation to Marin Cilic in 2014 when all Roger had to do was take out Cilic and then Kei Nishikori (neither of whom he had ever lost to at that point in time). For years, I've wondered what those two missed US Opens would have done for his legacy. Suddenly, after what has transpired this year, the pain has eased tremendously.

f) Roger is the only man to have played at least 5 finals at each major. At the French, he has one win (in 2009, thank heavens for Soderling) and 4 losses to the clay GOAT - Rafael Nadal. One wonders what the actual count might have been if the gods had not sent Nadal to mess with us FedFans.

g) But seriously, just watch these 5 games from the 5th set of the 2017 Australia Open again and marvel at how close it was to being a completely different narrative. A matter of inches...literally, on multiple occasions.



h) In 2012 after the Olympics in London, in spite of winning a silver medal, it seemed quite inconceivable that Federer would last as long as Rio in 2016. Verily, it came to pass - Federer did not play in Rio while recovering from his myriad injuries. But if you had told me in 2012 that he would not play in Rio but would win multiple majors in 2017, I would not have believed it possible. I am still having a tough time believing it.

i) Hailing from a nation where we revere the Krishnans and Amritraj for simply making it to the quarter-final at Wimbledon, it is astonishing to think that Federer has played 70 Grand Slam events (tied for first all-time with Fabrice Santoro) and has reached the quarter-final or better in 50 of them. Yes, 50 of them!

j) For a man known for the beauty of his groundstrokes and the fluidity and grace of his foot movement, it is mind-boggling to think that he is third all-time in the list of aces hit on the ATP tour. And, if he plays the rest of the year, he's definitely going to be #2 behind Ivo Karlovic.

k) The final word has to, definitely, belong to the late, great David Foster Wallace from his famous essay: Federer as a religious experience. Mind you, this was published on August 20, 2006, almost 11 years ago, but it still resonates just as loudly today:

... Roger Federer is showing that the speed and strength of today’s pro game are merely its skeleton, not its flesh. He has, figuratively and literally, re-embodied men’s tennis, and for the first time in years the game’s future is unpredictable. (...) Genius is not replicable. Inspiration, though, is contagious, and multiform — and even just to see, close up, power and aggression made vulnerable to beauty is to feel inspired and (in a fleeting, mortal way) reconciled.

(Credit: SI.com)

Reading the tea leaves

When the draw for the men's singles event of the 2015 French Open tennis tournament was announced, all eyes were focused on the quarterfinal where two titans were slated to clash against each other. Learned reporters nodded their collective heads and the phrase de facto final was bandied about.

After the first four rounds, the mega-clash came to be and so it came to pass - the winner of this particular quarterfinal DID win the French Open. While most people thought it would be the Djokovic-Nadal clash, any true tennis fan knew - the de facto final was the all-Swiss clash between Wawrinka and Federer. When Federer lost, my good friend DH and I knew that the GOAT had missed a golden opportunity to pad his resume.

Either way, watching Stan Wawrinka's blistering one-handed backhand made me smile, albeit with a tinge of sadness that it wasn't the other Swiss one-handed backhand player mesmerizing the audience.

चलो कोई बात नहीं, Federer नहीं तो Wawrinka ही सही!

Grateful to a GOAT

For many years I watched sports to root for a particular team, usually the Indian cricket team. But all that changed after I lost touch with (watching) cricket in the 1990's. When I was finally able to watch cricket again, the way I watched sports had changed.

I no longer root for a team. Instead I root for individual players and, by proxy, the teams they play for. I realized this aspect the year(s) I rooted for the New England Patriots (gasp!) simply because Randy Moss was on their roster. Now that Moss has left, I am back to not caring for the Patriots.

As the years have gone by the number of sportsmen who make me turn on the TV/computer to watch them has diminished due to retirement. VVS Laxman, Randy Moss, post-2010 Sachin Tendulkar and Greg Maddux were the prominent ones on the list. There are some stragglers who I don't watch any more but used to a until a few years ago like Jeff Gordon, Kobe Bryant and Tiger Woods (in his prime, El Tigre was as deadly and clutch under pressure as any sportsperson as I have ever seen).

Today, there is just ONE sportsman whom I try to watch whenever I get a chance to because I never know when he will stop playing professionally. A few days ago, it gave me great pleasure to wake up early in the morning to watch the man tick off one of the last items missing from his career resume - the Davis Cup.

Look at that concentration! He takes "watching the ball till the last moment" very seriously.

Watching Roger Federer play tennis is something else altogether. Most matches are won or lost on his terms because he is relentlessly attacking in nature, always looking for a way to end the point. The way he glides across the court, the way he manufactures shots from seemingly-impossible angles are the reasons I watch. In the future, there may be others who win more than him or have a more impressive career resume than him. But none of them will be able to convince me that Federer is not the best all-round tennis player I have ever seen. I was privileged enough to watch him once in person on Arthur Ashe stadium at the US Open and that memory is something I will always cherish. 

Roger is not my favorite tennis player ever (that would be Ivan Lendl) but he is definitely the one who has given me the most joy. Even as he fights Time and plays as well as he can, I know the light is burning fiercely but the candle is burning out soon. Yet he is out there "tarnishing" his legacy in the eyes of some, piling up the years without Grand Slam titles. But he is not going down quietly. He ended 2014 a few points shy of the #1 ranking (I predict he will return to #1 sometime before May 2015) and wowed us with the Davis Cup triumph and continues to play on.

And for that I am very grateful.

Poetry in slow-motion

It's no secret that I believe Roger Federer is the greatest tennis player of all-time.  Or, at least, if there was/is a tennis player with a greater range of shots combined with grace in hitting the yellow ball, I'd like to have watched him/her play.  And I'd still think Roger could have held his own.

The secret to his success (as it is with most other successful sportspersons) is how focused he is on the ball at the moment of impact and beyond.  Check out this video:

And if that isn't enough for you, check him out in super-slow-motion....
 

Running Diary: Australian Open 2010 - Federer-Murray

A year ago, I stayed up all night to do a running diary of the Australian Open men's final between Roger Federer and Rafael Nadal. Twelve months later, Roger Federer is back in the final, this time against Andy Murray. I was going to just watch it this time...but suddenly feel compelled to maintain another running diary.

So, here goes:

2:23am: This running diary will not be as up-to-date as my previous one. I am less emotionally vested in this one than I was 12 months ago. The reason is that in the past year Roger has won that elusive French Open to complete a career Slam, equaled and then surpassed Pete Sampras' record of Grand Slam singles titles (for men, obviously). The rest of his career, from here on in, is just icing on the cake as far as I am concerned. In my mind he is the GOAT!

2:27am: Obligate (awe-inspiring) numbers that have to be mentioned and gotten out of the way: This is Roger's 22nd Grand Slam final (second place: Ivan Lendl with 19). He has reached at least the semi-final of the last 23 Grand Slam tournaments (second place: Ivan Lendl 10). (Here is a list that was made up before the French Open in 2009, so some of the streaks have been added to or surpassed!)

2:29am: One final thing: starting from Wimbledon 2004, Federer has either won or lost to the eventual winner in every Grand Slam, a running total of 23 Grand Slam tournaments. Phew! A streak that continues today.

2:38am: If you feel that I am short-changing Andy Murray, then you are right. If it really gets you angry, then please feel free to maintain a Murray-centric blog and let me know, I will swing by and take a look at it.

2:40am: Why can't folks say Rafa-EL? Why do they keep saying Raf-E-al? Am I missing something about Nadal's first name? Grrr.

2:31am: My prediction? Federer in 4 sets. Big surprise there.

FIRST SET

2:32am: Federer starts the final by serving first. Murray begins with a fantastic backhand down the line. He needs to do that all day to win. Two booming forehands by Federer paves the way back from 0-30 to 30-30. The game goes to deuce but Federer works his way out of the slightly stressful game to hold serve. 1-0 Federer.

Interesting tidbit. Federer's first Grand Slam win was in his 17th attempt. This is Murray's 17th Grand Slam tournament. Does that portent well for Murray?

2:51am: After being very aggressive in the first game of the match, Murray regresses into a passive mode. Federer pounces and hits a backhand and a forehand winner to capitalize on two Murray mistakes that made it 0-30 to break. 2-0 Federer.

2:54am: Murry fights right back, hitting two brilliant passing shots to get back the break! After the first one, a backhand winner from way beyond the backhand side of the court, Federer acknowledges the winner by clapping on his racquet. Interesting. 2-1 Federer.

2:57am: Players almost exclusively serve to Federer's backhand on the second serve and Murray's strategy is no different. Federer is content to slice them back in for now. Murray is missing his first serve and that is not helping matters. When he finally does get two in, he controls the game from that point on. 2-2.

3:03am: Murray efficiently gets to double break point, capitalizing on Federer's propensity to attack lines, but Federer gets back to deuce with two winners, one off his first serve. Murray defends his way to a third break point and Federer responds with another first serve that puts Murray off-balance and he wins the point easily. Federer builds on that with two aces. Boom, boom and it is 3-2 Federer.

3:15am: Both players go through their service games to hold on, but Federer looks more shaky than Murray. Interestingly, Federer is trying different things and attempting to force the pace while Murray is content to pound away from the baseline to Federer's backhand. A quick analysis by ESPN shows that Murray has targeted Federer's backhand about 60% of the time so far today. 4-3 Federer.

3:22am: Murray slips up and falls behind on his serve, first 0-15, and then 15-30. Two exquisite backhands gets Federer to break point and he capitalizes by smashing an inside-out forehand to the Murray backhand to break. 5-3 Federer. Serving for the first set.

3:26am: Without much trouble Federer holds his serve. A couple of deep angled serves, two errors from Murray and the first set goes to Federer, one of history's best fast starters in Grand Slams (the exact stat escapes me but I believe Federer has an obscenely humungous advantage when he wins the first set in a Grand Slam match).

(Editor's note: Found it! Federer is 171-5 in Grand Slams when he wins the first set. 172-5 after this match.)

In the first set, Murray's first serve was abysmal, except for in one game where it bailed him out. He will not win today if he does not improve his first serve. Murray changes to a white t-shirt. Maybe that will change his luck.

SECOND SET

3:30am: Murray does exactly that, putting in a few more first serves, getting Federer to scramble and wins the first game easily. Encouraging signs. The humidity on the court is close to 80% and that is making it harder to hit outright winners as the ball is not traveling as fast as it normally does on hard courts. On an average there have been about 9 strokes per rally so far. Tennis strokes, that is. 1-0 Murray.

3:34am: Murray is an incredible ball-retriever but he needs to be more aggressive and take more chances. Federer is more fit and will outlast him in a slug-fest. 1-1 Federer.

3:36am: If you want to see Federer at his best, take a look at this game! Federer strings Murray from corner to corner, raises the ante, and smashes 4 winners to break Murray at love. The passing shot to get to 0-40 is among the best I have ever seen him hit. Not only was the placement good, it was emphatic, too. 2-1 Federer.

3:42am: Murray has a slight chance at 30-30 but he is oddly regressing to a passive style of play and Federer capitalizes by pounding away at Murray's confidence and ending the game with another forehand winner. 3-1 Federer.

3:45am: Murray is being taken to the cleaners here by Federer who hits two brilliant winners, the second one a backhand down the line from Murray's stable to get to double-break point. Murray responds with an ace and a backhand down the line of his own, as if to show Federer he can do it, too. Another service winner takes him to game point. Two deep backhands later, Murray holds. An important hold for him. It was at a similar point in the 2009 US Open final that Federer cracked against Del Potro and gave up all the momentum he had. 3-2 Federer.

3:52am: Eerily, at 40-30, Federer dumps a drop shot in the net when he had the whole court in front of him after a short return. He had done a similar thing (tried a stupid drop shot) against Del Potro and lost momentum. Luckily for him, Murray does not make him pay for it and Federer escapes. Phew! That as closer than any causal observer may imagine. 4-2 Federer.

3:56am: Federer settles down after that hold, and a settled Roger is a dangerous force of nature. Murray finds out the hard way, as Federer crafts a brilliant gameplan, moving Murray back and forth across the baseline, probing away and then swinging a winner to the opposite side to get to three break points. Murray responds by attacking Federer's backhand and constructing three good points to get to deuce. Good for him. Now he needs to sustain it and hold on. Aaargh! He plays the next point from 6 feet behind the baseline and Federer toys with him - break point again. Murray's first serve percentage is really going downhill and escapes when Federer barely misses the baseline from his forehand side. The next rally is one of the best of the match so far, which Murray wins when he attacks the net and Federer barely misses a running forehand down the line. Game point Murray. Another long rally later, Murray holds as Federer dumps a backhand into the net. Important game for Murray. Still some life left in the set. 4-3 Federer.

4:05am: Murray can learn something from Roger. Four huge first serves, huge for accuracy and direction more than speed, and an easy love game for Federer. Four emphatic winners. Vintage Federer. 5-3 Federer.

4:08am: Murray and Federer play an odd game, where neither really took the initiative but for one splendid crosscourt forehand from Federer. Unfortunately for him, that was his only winner and Murray holds to make Federer serve for the second set. 5-4 Federer.

4:12am: Roger Federer is on cruise control now. Four winners gives him a two sets to love lead. When Federer wins the first two sets of a match in a Grand Slam, he is 155-0. Federer is a virtual lock to win the tournament. Murray has not shown me much to suggest he can turn this around.

At this point, Murray has to throw caution to the winds and attack Federer - both forehand and backhand, hammer the serve in on both tries, and look to come into the net and shorten the points. No shame in losing the set but if he does not try to take more chances then it will all be for naught.

THIRD SET

The last time Federer lost a 2 set lead was on this very same court in 2003 in a Davis Cup match against Leyton Hewitt. A defeat that prompted Federer to be more aggressive and change his mental thought process. Since then he has waged an assault on the record books of staggering proportions.

[Editor's note: Tifosi Guy points out "Correction there JQ.
David Nalbandian defeated Roger Federer in the Master's final in Shanghai in 2005 after being two sets down.
Nalbandian won 6-7, 6-7 , 6-2, 6 -1, 7-6."

Mea culpa, TG.]

4:17am: Murray gets a few first serves in, and thunders his way to the first game. His body language is not encouraging, however. He is walking around with a mopey look, as if searching for pebbles on a beach. 1-0 Murray.

One thing that Murray has done very well all day has been to anticipate which direction Federer is going to serve. Either Murray is very quick to respond or he is picking up on some cue from Roger. In his autobiography, Agassi points out that he knew which way Boris Becker was going to serve based on which direction Becker stuck his tongue out.

Murray reaches break point and plays the best point of the match for him, stringing Federer back and forth but misses a backhand down the line to get back to deuce. Federer quickly capitalizes with a brilliant backhand overhead winner and a serve and charge to finish the game. 1-1.

Federer has got to be one of the best ever at hitting the overhead backhand volley. Sampras was quite good, though Agassi was even better at it. Federer is right up there with Andre, in my esteem.

4:24am: Murray is showing some signs of life, pounding away at the corners and taking a love game, with the help of a couple of errors from Federer. Errors induced by the pace of Murray's hits. I hope this registers in Andy's brain. 2-1 Murray.

4:28am: Federer holds (2-2) and Murray grapbs his right quad muscles (or maybe his right knee). These are not encouraging signs for him. Federer hits 8 straight flat shots - forehand and backhand- to start the next game and goes up 0-15. Murray responds with a service winner. Roger runs around a backhand and hits a crunching forehand down the line for a sweet winner. 15-30. Murray hits out from his forehand side and wins the next two points to go to game point (40-30). This is a pivotal game. If Murray cannot hold, the match is done. Federer gets a second serve, tries to run around his backhand and hit a forehand winner. Epic fail and Murray holds. 3-2 Murray.

4:36am: Murray gets up very quickly to 0-40 with one superlative winner and two errors. Federer hits three great first serves, which elicit weak returns. He is able to pound winners off the first two but unable to capitalize on the third and Murray breaks! 4-2 Murray.

4:38am: Murray begins the game with a fabulous cross-court forehand that was hit with a venom that has not been on display all game to go to 15-0. The second point features the first really bad mis-hit by the Federer sliced backhand all day. 30-0. A forehand in the net by Roger brings Murray to 40-0. Murray has won 10 of the last 12 points. Murray finishes the game with an ace down the middle. 5-2 Murray. Game on!

4:45am: Federer responds with an easy hold, two aces taking him to the end of the game. 5-3 Murray. Murray is 4 points from the third set. After a good first serve and a forehand miss from Federer he is 3 points away. A Federer forehand blast and an error from Murray later it is 15-30. Throats are tightening up as Federer does not move his feet and misses a forehand slice. 30-30. A second serve from Murray is eaten alive by Federer, a cross-court top-spin forehand later it is breakpoint Federer. A booming serve from Murray brings it back to deuce. Good time to get a 133mph first serve. Federer responds with a great running backhand passing shot that elicits a weak volley from Murray. Breakpoint again. A long-ish rally ends with Murray hitting a routine forehand into the net. Federer is back on serve. Ouch-time for Murray fans. 5-4 Murray.

4:55am: Federer suffers a couple of odd decisions (hitting back to Murray on an approach shot and a drop shot hit into the net from behind the baseline) but battles his way back on the basis of that big first serve of his to hold serve. 5-5.

4:58am: Three brilliant serves from Murray (two aces) and two errors from him on the forehand side bring the game to 40-30. Federer then responds by pounding the second serve, coming into the net, and surviving a great passing shot with a drop volley to get to deuce. Murray then comes into the net very quickly and Federer misses the passing shot to get to game point. Federer's answer to that is to hit a looping forehand crosscourt, wrongfooting Andy to get back to deuce. Murray and Federer are finally playing high quality tennis simultaneously, with Murray winning the point with an overhead winner. He follows that up with an ace, his third of this very game, to get ahead once more. 6-5 Murray.

It took quite a while for the match to produce good tennis from both players at the same time, but now that it has come, it is well worth the wait.

5:05am: Four winners from Federer takes it to the tie-break. Federer's career record in tiebreaks is 266-139, Murray's is 70-41. In Grand Slam Finals, Federer is 18-5. Murray starts with an ace and then wins the longest rally of the match on a forehand error by Roger. A quick 2-0 lead. A service winner by Federer gets him to 2-1, but the advantage is with Murray. Murray hits what seems like three straight winners before he finally wins the point to get to 3-1. Murray follows that up with a horrible backhand that barely falls inside the doubles line to give the mini-break back to Roger. Roger capitalizes with a booming serve to Andy's backhand for an easy service winner. They change sides at 3-3.

Murray is talking to himself, while Federer has not displayed any emotion, those Great White Shark-like dark eyes just boring away into the distance.

Another backhand error from Murray and Federer inches ahead 4-3. Still on serve, though. Nice crosscourt winner from Murray shows a gutsy side to him. 4-4. He follows it up with an ace. Once again Andy is two points away from winning the set. As Federer approaches the net, he asks Andy to hit a passing shot and Murray obliges. 6-4 and two set points for Andy. Federer saves one set point with an acutely angled forehand winner. Still set point, 6-5 Murray. Federer plays excellent defense and forces a forehand error from Murray. 6-6.

Has Murray lost his chance? I will go out on a limb and say yes. It will be either set point or match point the rest of this tiebreak on alternate points!

Federer hits a lousy forehand and gifts a set point to Murray. 7-6 Murray. Federer plays great defense once again and Murray misses a volley to get back to 7-7. Federer responds as he does best - an ace to go to match point! 8-7 Federer. Inches!! A forehand passing shot (by Roger) missed by just inches and it is 8-8. Phew! What a point. Roger mishits a backhand slice into the net and it is set point Andy. 9-8 Murray. Roger rushes to the net, forcing Murray to hit the winner and Murray fluffs his third attempt at a passing shot. 9-9.

Federer comes to the net yet again and hits a delicate backhand drop volley to get to his second match point. 10-9 Federer. Andy to serve to stay in the tournament. Federer is not showing any emotion whatsoever. He bombs away at an Andy second serve, and tries another drop volley that Andy reaches and pulls off a passing shot to tie it at 10-10. Federer rushes a forehand crosscourt shot, with Andy horribly out of position, and another set point for Murray. 11-10 Murray. Another of Federer's service bombs saves that set point. He follows that up with a typical big serve-second hit winner to get back to match point. 12-11 Federer. Is this it? Yes, it is!!!!!! Murray hits a backhand down the line into the net and Federer has won Grand Slam number 16. The first man to win three different Grand Slams at least 4 times.

Federer wins 6-3, 6-4, 7-6.

By the way, in my mind: Never. A. Doubt.

At this point, Federer is starting to get closer to the real Grand Slam leaders of all-time - the Margaret Court mark of 24 is within sight. Albeit quite some ways away but starting to get closer. After all, he is two-thirds of the way there! His competition is the ladies from here on in:

Margaret Court - 24
Steffi Graf - 22
Helen Wills Moody - 19
Martina Navratilova and Chris Evert - 18

Andy: "I can cry like Roger; it's just a shame I can't play like him.."
Roger: "Andy, you're too good of a player not to win a Grand Slam, so don't worry about it.."

Okay, this was as much fun for me as it was last year (the result notwithstanding). But it is time to sit back and reflect on Federer's performance, consistency, and elegance. He is a fabulous mix of durability and winning, something that has eluded some of the folks that have his number such as Murray, Guillermo Canas, David Nalbandian, and, of course, Rafael Nadal. They have the winning thing down but, sadly for tennis fans, are unable to sustain their presence on the court. I hope they come back strong, especially Rafael.

I leave you with this image of Federer telling you where he lies in my esteem:

(Associated Press 2010)

Doomsday conspiracy

The prevailing trend in news reporting these days is what I call the hail-or-fail syndrome. Reporters either predict the upswing or downswing of sporting icons depending supon what status they have attained in their sport.

So, either Roger Federer is the new heir to the Greatest of All-Time throne, or he is just a pretender whose best days are behind him. Should the downward moving person's fortunes make a turnaround for the better, as Federer's recently did, the very same naysayers will then turn around and be astonished that people wrote him/her off.

And on and on it goes...

The latest to receive such coverage is Tiger Woods. Now that three majors have gone by without a win in 2009, Tiger's days are surely numbered. Right? Gene Wojciechowski (ESPN.com) tries to provide some much-needed perspective.

Long live the Rajah

Roger Federer is now firmly entrenched as the most successful Grand Slam champion of all-time. There are numerous asterisk's that accompany this accomplishment but none of them concern him (Rod Laver missed 5 years worth of Grand Slams as he was ineligible to compete, Bjorn Borg never bothered to play the Australian Open after one attempt early on in his career, etc.).

For now, barely a year after Rafael Nadal broke through at Wimbledon and a few months after many folks (including me, I must admit) wondered if he would get back to his old self, Federer has reclaimed the #1 ranking.

SI.com put together a list of Federer's accomplishments in numeric form. The most amazing number in there for me is this one:

21 -- Consecutive appearances in Grand Slam semifinals, perhaps the most extraordinary metric of Federer's otherworldly consistency.

Greg Garber of ESPN.com salutes the maestro a few hours after the Wimbledon triumph.

Federer will not be content with 15 major titles. He arrived for his postmatch interview wearing a shirt bearing his new agenda: There is no finish line.

Here's a longer report of the final against Andy Roddick, with a comparison to Pete Sampras, whose record he broke.

The statistics were eye-catching: Federer's 50 aces were one short of the Wimbledon record held by Ivo Karlovic. Federer had an incredible total of 107 winners, compared with 38 unforced errors. Roddick had 27 aces, 74 winners and 33 unforced mistakes.

By the way, the 50 aces by Federer are easily the most ever in a Grand Slam final. Surprisingly, hitting aces does not correlate all that well with victory, as this list reveals:

55 - Ivo Karlovic (Roland Garros 2009) 5 sets, lost to Lleyton Hewitt

54 - Gary Muller (Wimbledon 1993, qualifying match) 3 sets, defeated Peter Lundgren

51 - Joachim Johansson (Australian Open 2005 ) 4 sets, lost to Andre Agassi
51 - Ivo Karlovic (Wimbledon 2005) 5 sets, lost to Daniele Bracciali

50 - Chris Guccione (Wimbledon 2005, qualifying match) 3 sets, defeated Olivier Patience
50 - Gregory Carraz (Andrézieux 2004 - Challenger) 3 sets, defeated Tomas Zib *
50 - Roger Federer (Wimbledon 2009) 5 sets, defeated Andy Roddick

49 - Richard Krajicek (US Open 1999) 5 sets, lost to Yevgeny Kafelnikov

48 - Marc Rosset (Davis Cup 2001) 5 sets, lost to Arnaud Clement

47 - Gustavo Kuerten (Davis Cup 2003) 5 sets, lost to Daniel Nestor
47 - Gilles Muller (Australian Open 2009) 5 sets, defeated Feliciano Lopez

Finally, to round it off, my favorite tennis writer - L. Jon Wertheim has 50 parting shots from Wimbledon 2009.

• For the second straight major, the eight men's quarterfinalists were from eight different countries.

• Most underrated story: the Indian-Pakistani doubles team of Prakash Amritraj and Aisam-ul Haq Qureshi, won a few matches. Qureshi has now played with an Indian and an Israeli at Wimbledon. Small steps. But steps nonetheless.

• Here's Scott on the WTA ranking system: "The one place it doesn't stir a debate is in the locker room. The players believe in that ranking system. They believe the ranking is right. And I have not had one player come up to me and say, 'How can Dinara Safina be No. 1 in the world?'"

• Here's Serena Williams -- who apparently spends little time in aforementioned locker room -- on the same subject:

"I think if you hold three Grand Slam titles maybe you should be No. 1, but not on the WTA Tour obviously, so. ... You know, my motivation is maybe just to win another Grand Slam and stay No. 2, I guess (laughter). ... That's just shocking. But whatever. It is what it is. I'd rather definitely be No. 2 and hold three Grand Slams in the past year than be No. 1 and not have any. "

• Here's Serena again: "I feel like I've had a pretty consistent year, though, you know." Come again? You've won "only" two tournaments in 2009, but they've both been majors. And sandwiched between them was a four-match losing streak. What exactly constitutes an inconsistent year?

The future is now

In a remarkably prescient article, James Lawton stirred the tea leaves and saw a period of domination of epic proportions when Roger Federer won his first Grand Slam at Wimbledon in 2003.

It is a credit to Federer that he lived up to the article and more. And how! May he continue to impress us all with his virtuosity for years to come.

The Rajah and I

Shortly after Roger Federer completed the career Slam, Jon Wertheim (one of my favorite sports writers) weighed in on Roger's accomplishments, and many other related topics.

USTA.com: In spending time with both of these guys, how would you characterize the nature of the relationship between Nadal and Federer? For such close rivals, they seem to be very good friends.

Wertheim: Yeah, and I don't think it’s for the cameras, either. They're obviously very different – they play differently, and they're of different tennis generations. Yet I think they have a similar set of classy values and beliefs. They believe in acting a certain way and saying certain things. In some ways, they're bound together by the rivalry, and that limits how close they can really get. But I suspect, if they lived in the same dorm, they'd be friends.

Now that we know what we know about Roger's achievements, the following interview is very interesting to watch. This was conducted in early 2001, just after he had won the first tournament of his life. Note the irony in what he wants to achieve in Grand Slam events and pay close attention to his response when he is asked if any player would be able to dominate tennis in the future.

The X man

Many people scoff at me for my rooting interest in the Los Angeles Lakers. They beieve this has to do with Kobe Bryant. While I like watching him play, the real reason I root for them is the man behind the team - the coach Phil Jackson. I spent many years in Chicago overlapping with his championship-winning years, including the seminal 72-10 campaign of 1998 and have been rooting for him since then.


Yesterday, he won his 10th NBA championship as a coach (in just 18 years of coaching in the league), the most all-time. To me, the more staggering numbers are this:

• He has won more than 70% of the games he has coached (and he has coached almost 1800 games)
• His teams have never had a losing record in any season.
• In a best-of-7 playoff series, his teams have won the first game on 50 different occasions. His teams have then gone on to win all 50 of them.

Jack McCallum of SI.com compares Jackson with Red Auerbach, the Boston Celtics head coach who also won 9 NBA championships. Jack notes that while they may appear to be vastly different personalities on the surface, if you dig a little deeper, their basic natures are quite similar.

It would've been fun to watch Auerbach and Jackson coach against each other, the former fussing and fuming and pacing the sideline, the latter sitting there with that Zen-like calm, calling his timeouts according to some inner clock, running the game with a seeming caprice that actually comes from a fundamental plan. There would inevitably come a time when they would torch each other in public, Auerbach with a straight-to-the-point rant, Jackson with a witty, circuitous insult. But winners almost always respect other winners, and, my best guess is, if they were pressed to tell the truth, here's what each would say about the other: He's a great coach.

Prior to winning the 10th championship, Eric Neel of ESPN.com also did a piece on the man with some background from his early years.

Cover art

It is very hard for a non-mainstream sportsperson to make it to the cover of Sports Illustrated (unless they have done something really bad), so it comes as a surprise (and a pleasure) to see Roger Federer feted for his French Open triumph by SL Price.

Historians will look at Federer's résumé—at least five U.S. Open titles, five Wimbledons, three Australians and one French—measure it against Laver's 11 and Sampras's Frenchless 14 and declare him supreme. But there's also the matter of Federer's unparalleled consistency: Federer has made an astonishing 20 straight Grand Slam semifinals (compared with runner-up Ivan Lendl's 10) and has appeared in 10 straight finals and in 15 of the last 16. Laver's longest string of consecutive finals was six, Sampras's three.

(...)

Agassi, whose own legacy had been transformed 10 years before by victory on the same court, handed Federer the trophy, and the champion held it over his head before bringing it down for a long, hard kiss. During the Swiss national anthem, tears rolled down his cheeks. "Now for the rest of my career I can play relaxed," Federer told the crowd. Then he put down the microphone and the sky opened up and the red clay turned to mud, but it felt like Paris was smiling. Roger Federer has nothing to cry about anymore.

GOAT or goat?

Steve Waught recently proclaimed that Ricky Ponting was the greatest Aussie batsman since Don Bradman.

Four years ago, the very same Steve Waugh was proclaiming that Matthew Hayden was the greatest batsman, barring Don Bradman.

Hmmm, how long will it be before Michael Hussey is annointed the next king by the quote-happy Waugh? Well, it looks like some others are already jumping on that bandwagon.

Explanation

In a previous post I used the phrase - "GOAT discussions". The acronym stands for - Greatest Of All Time.

("GOAT" is the title of a recent, humongous biography of Muhammad Ali. When I say humongous, I mean humongous - GOAT, which is nearly 800 pages long, weighs almost 34 kgs (75 lbs) and is 50 cm x 50 cm (20" x 20") in size).