As with many tennis fans I am eagerly looking forward to Wimbledon commencing on 20th June (now in its 125th year). With Andy Murray playing so well in the Aegron Championships at Queens Club there is a realistic prospect that the Number 4 seed in the world could lift the mens All England Championship Trophy come the 3rd July.
However, in order to do so he would have to inevitably overcome the ‘master blaster’ Rafa Nadal – who I consider debatably the best tennis player of all time.
Some may consider this view preposterous as the ‘King of Tennis’ still reigns in the shape of the Swiss maestro Roger Federer. Please can I make this crystal clear that I am a great admirer of Roger Federer and have some sympathy with the view that Federer is probably the best player ever to walk onto a tennis court. There certainly has never been such an elegant player with more beautiful form and strokes or all around game. Tennis has never seen another player like Federer who can move with such grace and speed, and who never seems to break a sweat or get his shoes and socks dirty as his feather-light footwork carries him ballet-dancer like around the court.
With his classic strokes (updated for today's new power game), Federer would easily have been at home among the players of William Tilden, Jack Crawford and Fred Perry, playing with wooden rackets and adorned in cream long pants. With the most major Grand Slam singles titles ever at 16, you would need to have the adversary skills of John Mortimer's fictional barrister character, Rumpole of the Bailey to argue against the many who have anointed Federer as the “Greatest of All Time”.
However, with the demolition by Rafal Nadal over Federer in 4 sets in the French Open Final the assertion of the Ferderer’s supporters of him being the best ever deserves closer scrutiny. It would be erroneously to just believe Nadal is just the “King of Clay” he is far more versatile than that.
Looking purely at statistics only, Federer has lost for the 17th time overall to Nadal whereas the Spaniard has lost to the Swiss 8 times. In Grand Slam Finals, Nadal holds a decisive 6-2 edge over Federer. Nadal is also the youngest player of the open era to win a career Grand Slam (winning all four Grand Slam singles titles) and the second male player (Andre Agassi is the other) to win a Career Golden Slam (all four Grand Slams and an Olympic Gold medal). He has also won three Davis Cup Finals as part of the Spanish team. By comparison, Federer has never won a singles Olympic Gold medal or won a Davis Cup Final for his country.
Nadal, who just turned 25 years old, now has won 10 Grand Slam singles titles, only 6behind Federer who turns 30 in August. They also have to contend with Novak Djokovic and Andy Murray both 24, who are seeking to usurp their throne. No one can predict how many more Grand Slam singles titles Roger has left in him, or how many more years Rafa's extreme physical style of play will allow him to continue before his knees finally give out. Can Rafa eventually eclipse Roger's record-breaking 16 Grand Slam titles? Time will tell.
I believe it's hard for Federer to be considered the greatest player of all time when he's lost to Rafa more than twice as many times as he's beaten him. It could be legitimately considered that Federer might not be even the best player of his own era. Rumpole of the Bailey could certainly argue the case.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment