That Guy's Awesome

This post is my ode to Rafa. Because seriously, I love that kid.

It's sometimes easy, when you are so firmly entrenched in Camp Federer (which we all know I am), to remember that Rafa is also made of awesome and that Roger would probably not be quite as awesome with that Rafa relationship in his life.

I don't want to talk about Rafa's tennis career here. I don't want to talk about his injury woes, his problems, the fact that he might not have the longevity of some other players. I just want to talk about the fact that Rafa is awesome. He's often overshadowed by Roger, because Roger is a) also awesome, b) such a good statesman and c) so good at English. But we cannot overlook just how amazing Rafa is for the game and how much he has contributed.

It's always easy to talk about Rafa in terms of Roger and how their bromance has become the defining bromance of sport - and one of the greatest bromances of all time. This was shown nowhere more clearly than at Hit for Haiti 2, where two dudes clearly not having a bromance fought with words while Roger and Rafa shrugged at each other across the net. Their friendship and the gentlemanly nature of their rivalry is totally awesome and one of the best things about tennis in many ways, because I think it has changed tennis for the better.

But I want to talk about Rafa the individual, because I think he, by himself, has made tennis more awesome. Kids growing up and idolising Rafa are learning not only the statesmanship which is now so great at the top of the game, and they're not just learning the fierce lefty spins and the hooking forehand - though they too are great for the game. What they're learning is a level of mental toughness I don't believe anyone else in the game even approaches. Rafa has, I would argue, a mind of steel - and it's probably the most steely mind in the history of tennis. Has their ever been anyone who fought harder than Rafa Nadal, who backed himself more, who believed he could win even when it looked spectacularly unlikely?

I don't think there has been. And that's why I think that, even though I'm a huge Fedfan and I think we should celebrate the greatness of Federer the man and the Federer/Nadal bromance, we should stop every now and again and celebrate the greatness of Nadal. Because Rafa... well, that guy's awesome.

The King of the Grass Castle

If you can meet with triumph and disaster

And treat those two imposters just the same...

*

These are the lines from Rudyard Kipling's poem If that are writ large above the entrance to Centre Court, the last things that the players see before they enter the arena of battle. Two men enter. One man leaves.

*
Welcome to Thunderdome.

*

And today, no one wanted to leave. For one there was triumph, the other defeat, but it took a mammoth epic to discover who was whom, who would hold up the greatest trophy in tennis and who would suffer an abject, heartbreaking defeat.

*

Andy Roddick fought. He fought harder than anyone, including me, believed him capable. He played tennis the likes of which he has not played since - no, scratch that, I have never seen him play like this. What he did out today required not only huge amounts of heart and guts and other visceral organs, but it required cleverness and tactics and a whole lot of skill.

*

But destiny would not be denied.

*

And Roger Federer had a date with destiny, and he didn't want to be late.

*

What a match this was. Last year might have been technically longer in minutes, but the epic of this year cannot be underestimated. The Wimbledon final has produced some excellent finals over the last three years in particular - all five sets, all involving Roger Federer, and all brilliant and heartbeaking all at once. And though last year's match, where Rafael Nadal dethroned the great man, has been called the greatest match of all time, I believe that year's match will take a rightful place beside it.

*

For a match to be great, there needs to be two worthy opponents - and I cannot praise the efforts of Andy Roddick highly enough. To take the King of the Grass Castle to five sets, to a fifth set that will be remembered down the ages... I don't have the right words to describe what he has done. What a rejuvenation for his career. I read a great line somewhere today that said that Andy Roddick had found his mojo and found his Mirka, and I can't agree highly enough. Brooklyn Decker has been a wonderful influence on the A-Rod - and one cannot underestimate the effect that the brilliant mind of Larry Stefanki has had. Roddick is a whole new player. He is more than a serve with a forehand attached. His double-handed backhand was unbelievably effective - and I don't know how he fixed his volleys, but he has done it with aplomb. I cannot praise him highly enough.

*

But today, in the end, belonged to the King. To the greatest player of all time. To the man that now holds all the records. 15 time Slam winner - 5 US Opens, 3 Australian Opens, 1 hardfought, brilliant Roland Garros and now an incredible 6 Wimbledons. The man who has reached 21 consecutive Slam semi-finals. The man who has played better and more consistently than any man in history. A man who now holds sixty singles titles.

*

The Roland Garros and Wimbledon dual champion who has now ascended the pedestal once more and become the #1 player in the world.

*

Today belonged to the greatest tennis player the world has ever seen. And it was fitting that so many of the greats were there to watch him. Bjorn Borg, who also won the Roland Garros and Wimbledon titles in a single season. Rod Laver, twice winner of the calendar year Grand Slam. And Pete Sampras, whom Federer has surpassed today as the winner of fifteen career Slams. All these men are great. But Federer has transcended their achievements, has ascended to another level.

*

Destiny came calling for Roger Federer today. And with Swiss precision, he answered her call. There was a sense of profound rightness when he held up the trophy - the sense that some kind of order had been restored, that something incredibly, truly right had happened. And so it is with the great champions. Everything they do, they deserve.

*

And Roger Federer belongs in their league, as the greatest of the great. Here at Wimbledon, he has experienced both triumph and disaster, and treated those two impostors just the same. He has filled the unforgiving minute with sixty seconds worth of distance run.

*

And his is the earth, and everything that's in it - and what's more, what a man he is, my son!

*

*

Today's Results

*

The Championships (Wimbledon)

*

Men's Draw

*

Roger Federer def. Andy Roddick, 5-7 7-6 (8-6) 7-6 (7-5) 3-6 16-14

Greatest Of All Time

"The big moments are gonna come. You can't help that. It's what you do afterwards that counts. That's when you find out who you are."

*

That quote isn't strictly tennis related - yeah, okay, it's from Buffy - but my God, does it apply here one hundred percent, especially considering the theme of monster-slaying we've been considering as regards my man Roger Federer. The big moment came, and he fought to get there. I can't remember a tournament when he's fought harder - and of course it should be hard. This is a Grand Slam, and this is history. He made it to the moment. The moment came. And the world found out exactly who Roger Federer is.

*

The greatest tennis player of all time.

*

This cannot be disputed now. He has now won fourteen Grand Slams, putting him in equal first place with Pete Sampras - but unlike Sampras, he has won them on all four surfaces. He has made twenty consecutive semi finals. In addition to three runner up finishes at Roland Garros, one at Wimbledon and one at the Australian Open, Roger Federer owns five Wimbledon titles, five US Opens, three Australian Opens and one Roland Garros title.

*

It was the title they said he could never win. The gaping hole on his resume that was to put a question mark over his greatness. Three times he made the final, and three times he lost, including an absolute drubbing against Rafael Nadal last year. But not this year. Not this year.

*

With one monster left between him and history, Roger Federer did not falter. We did not see him waiver, not for one instant. From the moment that he won the first point I think the world knew, in their hearts, that it was time. This moment has been coming - for too long, some thought, writing off this great man. But Roger was patient, and he fought, and he got there. And when the moment came, he stood tall. He looked history in the face and seized it with both hands.

*

This is his time. This is his moment. And this, my friends, is history.

*

It is often the case, I find, that people who are not otherwise into tennis at all have a special place in their hearts for Roger Federer. As great as other players like Nadal and even Sampras and Agassi are, no one has ever captured the heart of the masses like this man. He has walked with kings and kept the common touch. He has personified every 'if' Rudyard Kipling could possibly throw at him. He is the greatest champion our sport has ever had, but, perhaps, more importantly, he has been our sport's greatest sportsman. He has personified everything that sport should be - fair and honest and beautiful.

*

He is the greatest of all time.

*

I have waited so long to say these words. I believed them already, I think, long ago - his case for greatness has been convincing for some years now - but if people doubt him now, then they are completely deluded. The moment has come, the time has arrived when we can fete our hero as we ought to - for he is our hero. He is the hero of the masses, of the people, in a way that no one else has ever been. He has been the sentimental darling of our hearts for many years now, this gentle, beautiful, brilliant man - and now we have arrived at the moment where this man has made history, where he has transcended everyone, where he has achieved total tennis immortality.

*

I saw him play once. I can tell my children, and their children, that I once saw the greatest tennis player of all time in the flesh - and the man who was the personification of everything that should be great in sport. He is a hero to so many, an inspiration, and I don't know if people have ever willed anyone to succeed more. But in the end, take away all the fans, everyone in the arena, everything but the tennis and the moment. Take away all that. There was Roger. There was Soderling, his opponent. And there was the moment when greatness was within his grasp.

*

He was tried and he was tested, and he was not found wanting. And now history has been made.

*

We live in the age of Roger Federer - the greatest tennis player of all time. And what an honour and a privilege it is.

*

*

Today's Results

*

French Open (Roland Garros)

*

Men's Draw

*

Roger Federer def. Robin Soderling, 6-1 7-6 (7-1) 6-4

The Stephen Hawking of Tennis

The top story on the ATP website today is about a poll they did of fans - I remember voting in it - about who will be the year-end #1 at the end of next year. The winner? Roger Federer, with 42% of the vote.

*

I'm unable to decide if this is surprising or not. Rafa is #1 now, and I think most people have finally caught up with that fact - not to mention the fact that Roger is ten points away from slipping to #3. But taking nothing away from Rafa and yes, even Novak Djokovic, I think this is an indication of the faith people have in the immense genius of Roger Federer. He may not be as young as he used to be (an old man at 27) and he may not have had the bestest year ever this year, but in the public mind and ideology, if that is not too strong a word to use, Federer is still #1. The legacy of his incredible dominance is this profound belief that he is too good to be #2 for long.

*

And I'm right on that bandwagon. Much as I was saying the other day that Rafa is one of the greats too and we're living in an age of true tennis greatness (for men - women is a whole other story), the genius and the greatness of Federer transcends even that. What he has done is so phenomenal that he can lay claim to the title of Greatest of All Time. Rafa Nadal is great, one of the greats, but I doubt anyone would call him the greatest: certainly not yet, anyway. Greatest dirtballer, maybe, but when it comes to Greatest Player Ever, my mind only goes one place, and that is straight to Federer.

*

Historical competition includes Rod Laver and Pete Sampras, both of whom were fabulous, as well as a whole pantheon of other tennis greats. But I don't know if any player has ever had quite the same mystique as Federer. If he is on, playing to the best of his ability, there is only one player in recent memory who has even come close to beating him, and it isn't Rafael Nadal - it's Marat Safin. (Australian Open semi '05 - heartbreaker, but one of the greatest matches ever.) He is a prodigy, the Stephen Hawking of tennis - his genius for the sport is so great I don't know if we will ever see anyone with so much pure, unadulterated talent. He is tennis clinic and tennis statesman all in one - because have we ever seen more evidence that tennis is a gentleman's game than in this man?

*

This wasn't meant to turn into a paeon of praise, but all of it is deserved. I'm part of that posse whom thinks Federer will get back to #1 - and it's good to know I'm in the majority.

An Age Of Greatness

I think we have to admit it - when it comes to men's tennis, we are living in an age of greatness.

*

The word 'greatness' is one that tends to get bandied round a lot - it's something I especially notice in Australian sport. We have some really, really good teams, yeah? Our cricket team, for example. I'm no cricket aficiando, but it seems to me that our team has been lauded here as the 'greatest ever' for about fifteen, twenty years now: certainly as long as I can remember. But surely the team has changed almost totally over these years - so how can it make the claim to be the greatest ever?

*

Team sport and individual sport are different, I know - maybe cricket is a bad example. But I think we may be able to safely say that this era in men's tennis is one of the greatest, if not the greatest, ever.

*

Why do I make this claim? You have to go straight to the top. No one can contest Roger Federer's claim to be one of the all-time tennis great - if not the greatest of all time. He has an amazing genius for the sport while being an outstanding statesman. But now - I say now, it's been coming for a while - we have the emergence of Rafa Nadal. He's not just some schlep who usurped Federer's position at the top because Roger was having a bum year. He's genuinely an amazing player - and I mean amazing. That's what sparked this rant off, actually - there's an article in DEUCE magazine about Nadal's pursuit of various tennis historical geats and his claim to all-time greatness. And I think we have to realise this. We are spectators in one of the most intriguing, high-level sports rivalries of all time. Even Sampras/Agassi had nothing on Roger/Rafa. We only have to look at the final of Wimbledon to understand the intensity and the high-level of their rivalry. And it's not a rivalry in the antagonistic sense - I get the feeling Roger and Rafa quite like each other, really. They're certainly always very cordial to each other: and, moreover, both are gentlemen. I feel that's part of being a true great - it extends off court as well. And on court - can anyone deny these are two of the most phenomenal players world tennis has ever seen? Rafa is certainly the greatest claycourter of all time. Roger has got a pretty good grip on that Greatest of All Time trophy. We are so privileged.

*

And, just to bring it down a notch, it really shows up what's going on with women's tennis at present... I don't think anyone would say this is one of the greatest ages for women's tennis ever. The top level is confused at best, and I think a lot of people have felt that those who have reached #1 this year haven't really deserved it. Would anyone say that of Roger or Rafa? I think not. We have too many #1s in men's tennis and too few in women's - and I know which problem I'd prefer!

Go Jo!

Okay, so I SO want Jo-Wilfried Tsonga to win in Paris. Can you think of anyone who deserves it more? His year started out so well, but I was really worried he'd be a one-hit wonder after he was out for so long with injury. But not so, it seems. Winning Paris-Bercy would really cap off a stellar breakout year for him, I feel. He's got the talent and the game to be in the top ten - hell, he's got the ability to knock Djokovic and Murray off their perches and form a whole new Big Three. He had a fabulous win over James Blake in his semi-final. The Australian Open was a spectacular preview - winning in Paris would be a sure-fire way of saying, 'hello, tennis, Jo-W is in the house!'

*

Not that Nalbandian doesn't deserve to win - and we all know he has the ability to, as he won he last year as part of that big late year surge. It would certainly be good in the lead up to Davis Cup to have Nalbandian on a hot streak: to have a Nalbandian at the height of his powers plus the undeniably hot Juan Martin del Potro would certainly make for an awesome final. Rafa's ability can never be in doubt, but he seems to have a wee bit of an injury, and also he's never beaten Nalbandian, and it's on Nalbandian's favourite surface... add to which the other Spanish singles player will probably be David Ferrer, who has been Maratishly sketchy of late, and you have a tie and a half.

*

Back to Paris, and this should be a very intriguing final. There are definitely pros for either guy winning - Jo-W to cap off his breakout year and Headbandian for Davis Cup purposes - but I have to say that my heart is with Jo-W, purely because of his personality. He's so vibrant and exciting to watch and is so clearly into his tennis in a big way... and Headbandian is so dour and monosyllabic. He's fun to watch, but when it comes to the post-match interview he leaves much to be desired. Maybe that's part of why Federer is so good - he is wonderful on and off court. You'd never catch him being all sour like LameDave or stupidly provocative like Djokovic. Even when he hates something - like HawkEye - he hates it diplomatically and maturely.

*

And that's what part of being a true champion is, I think - being a statesman. Rafa is in this mode as well, on the whole: excellent player, excellent statesman. So when my prediction comes true and Tsonga knocks off Djokovic to become the latest member of the Big Three (God, that makes it sound like a boy band!) he too will have to learn this skill if he wants to be one of those real champions, who is great on and off court.

*

I'm not exactly sure how this preview of an exciting final turned into musings on how to be a champion... sorry about that philosophical digression. To sum up: good work Jo-W and Headbandian, for taking out Blake and Davydenko. And tomorrow... go Jo!

*

*

Today's Results

*

BNP Paribas Masters (Paris)

*

David Nalbandian def. Nikolay Davydenko, 6-1 5-7 6-4

Jo-Wilfried Tsonga def. James Blake, 6-4 6-3

*

*

Bell Challenge (Quebec)

*

Nadia Petrova def. Angela Haynes, 6-1 6-3

Bethanie Mattek def. Aleksandra Wozniak, 7-6 (7-4) 6-3

Sunrise

The Wimbledon final finished at about 6:30 here yesterday morning, and not long after, the sun rose. I sobbed it up. Just as it was for Roger Federer, it was the hardest tennis loss I had ever experienced.

*

But the sun still rose.

*

And now that terrible loss was yesterday. And today is the first day of the rest of Roger Federer's life.

*

The loss will haunt me for a while, just as it will haunt him. But what does not kill him will make him stronger - and this loss will not kill him, no. Not him. Not the greatest sportsman the world has ever seen. Even if he lost that final, there is nothing that will ever stop this man being a champion. No one can take away what he has already achieved and no one can take away what this man is. He is a champion. And champions do not roll over and die.

*

The field has been improving. They have started nipping at his heels, the Nadals and Djokovics of the world. But Roger is still on top. He is still the best. And he can still improve. Because that is what he is. That is what he does. He is Roger Federer, and Roger Federer fights and fights and fights and never, ever gives up. I have watched him do it. I have learned it from him. Never lose hope. Never give in. Don't you dare dream it's over.

*

Wimbledon 2008 is over. We cannot change the past. But we can change the future. And that is where Wimbledon 2009 is. And do you think Roger is going to let someone else hold that Wimbledon trophy next year? Oh no. No. He will fight. He will fight. Because that he is who he is. That is what he does. The field is improving, yes? What will Roger do? He will improve too.

*

This is one of the darkest hours in Roger Federer's career - a self described 'disaster.' But it is always darkest before dawn. The sun will rise.

*

Remember how Justine Henin lost in the semis of Wimbledon last year to Marion Bartoli and then didn't lose a match for the rest of the year? I would not be at all surprised to see Mr Federer do the same thing - but without the whole giving up and retiring halfway through the next year. Roger Federer has not yet won the Grand Slam, despite his five Wimbledons, four US Opens and three Australian Opens . (Who else has that pedigree, hmm?) 2009, my friends, 2009. Because it is darkest before dawn. It is darkest now. It can hardly get darker.

*

But he is Roger Federer, and he will make the sun rise. And when I sob it up this time, they will be tears of happiness.

*

*

Today's Results

*

Mercedes Cup (Stuttgart)

*

Andreas Beck def. Daniel Brands, 3-6 6-3 6-4

Juan Martin del Potro def. Evgeny Korolev, 6-3 7-5

Pablo Cuevas def. Santiago Giraldo, 4-6 6-4 7-6 (13-11)

Michael Berrer def. Eric Prodon, 6-3 6-4

Albert Montanes def. Jose Acasuso, 6-3 7-6 (7-5)

Oscar Hernandez def. Santiago Ventura, 6-1 6-4

*

*

Allianz Suisse Open (Gstaad)

*

Kristof Vliegen def. Martin Vassallo Arguello, 6-3 6-4

Guillermo Canas def. Ivo Minar, 7-6 (11-9) 6-3

Guillermo Garcia-Lopez def. Michael Lammer, 5-7 6-3 6-2

Igor Andreev def. Marcos Daniel, 6-4 7-5

Florent Serra def. Daniel Gimeno-Traver, 7-6 (7-2) 7-6 (7-5)

Marin Cilic def. Josselin Ouanna, 6-3 6-4

*

*

Catella Swedish Open (Bastad)

*

Boris Pashanski def. Nicolas Massu, 6-2 6-3

Bjorn Rehnquist def. Michal Przysiezny, 7-5 6-2

*

*

Campbell's Hall of Fame Tennis Championships (Newport)

*

Rohan Bopanna def. Kevin Kim, 6-3 6-4

Mikhail Ledovskikh def. Kristian Pless, 4-6 7-5 6-4

Brendan Evans def. Paul Capdeville, 6-4 3-6 6-1

Donald Young def. Woong-Sun Jun, 6-3 2-6 6-4

Alexander Peya def. Philipp Petzschner, 6-7 )3-7) 6-3 7-5

Vince Spadea def. Simon Stadler, 6-2 3-6 6-4

*

*

Gaz de France Grand Prix (Budapest)

*

Tsvetana Pironkova def. Teodora Mircic, 6-3 6-1

Tzipora Obziler def. Ioana Raluca Olaru, 6-3 6-2

Lucie Safarova def. Kira Nagy, 6-2 6-2

Anna-Lena Groenefeld def. Palma Kiraly, 6-0 6-4

Messrs Sunday

Those crazy boys are at it again. Roger and Rafa, those crazy final kings, are at it again.

*

Remember 2005, when there basically wasn't a title that wasn't won by one of those two? Good times, good times. That year was the year of Rafa's ascendancy, his first French Open, when he cemented himself as #2 in the world. And he hasn't looked back.

*

Let's start with Rafa, who, even though he is #2 and has won lots of stuff (including the Match We Do Not Speak Of), is still the apprentice Mr Sunday. His match was the harder of the two, obviously, being as he was playing against Novak Djokovic. (A friend and I have started referring to him as Novak, Prince of Lies... just an aside.) This one had the potential to go the distance. Obviously, it didn't, but it wasn't for lack of trying.

*

Of course, I haven't actually SEEN this match, so I am going off scores and stats here. This one could have gone either way - actually, no. That's a lie. Rafa was the one who came through when it counted, therefore he deserves it. Tennis really isn't about how many points you win, it's about when you win them. It is totally possible for a player to win more points but then lose the match - think of the Dubai final in 2006! There was only one point separating Rafa and the Djoker at the end of the first set - 50 points to 49 - but it was Rafa who won that point when it counted.

*

I am aware that my inner Fedfan should be horrified at the notion of Rafa winning a grass court tournament when he has, for the last two years, been Roger's biggest competition on grass. But I have the faith. There has been a lot of commentary around about how Roger's hold on Wimbledon is slipping and how he won't win it this year. Forgive me if I put my faith in the man who has won 59 straight matches on grass courts, including five Wimbledon titles, and is the greatest tennis player of all time. That doesn't sound unreasonable to me.

*

And I like to see Rafa doing well. Quite apart from anything else, I want to see him pulling away from Djokovic in the points race... although not enough to will him to a Wimbledon victory (not over Federer, anyway.) And it's not like Djokovic doesn't have points to defend at Wimbledon. He made the semis last year. And grass court tennis is the most cutthroat of all the surfaces. Lose a few points at the wrong time, and the set is gone. And it only takes three sets to win a match. This is part of what makes Federer's grass court achievement so marvellous.

*

Roger was never going to not win that match against Kohlschreiber last night. He was in total control the whole time. He has gone the whole week without dropping a set, and, more impressively, without dropping his serve. This is the best possible week he could have hoped for after the Match We Do Not Speak Of. If a week this brilliant will not shut critics up, then I don't know what will.

*

Of course, speaking as a baby amateur critic myself, there is very little that can change you once you form an opinion... it is possible (like my changing attitude to Rafa) but not likely... I can't ever see myself changing my viewpoint on Djokovic. Not unless he like, attains world peace or something. And even then, I'll probably think he stole the idea off Federer.

*

So Mr Sunday and his matador apprentice both proved why they are the best players in the world this week. Both backed it up from the Match We Do Not Speak Of, and both thoroughly deserved their wins. I have a feeling that the tennis this coming week will not be half so interesting... neither Rafa nor Roger is playing, but as we know, that has never stopped me talking about them. Bring on Wimbledon! Where, I believe, we will once more see a match between the Messrs Sunday... with the Master coming out on top this time!

*

*

Today's Results

*

Artois Championships (Queen's Club, London)

*

Rafael Nadal def. Novak Djokovic, 7-6 (8-6) 7-5

*

*

Gerry Weber Open (Halle)

*

Roger Federer def. Philipp Kohlschreiber, 6-3 6-4

*

*

Orange Warsaw Open (Warsaw)

*

Nikolay Davydenko def. Tommy Robredo, 6-3 6-3

*

*

DFS Classic (Birmingham)

*

Kateryna Bondarenko def. Yanina Wickmayer, 7-6 (9-7) 3-6 7-6 (7-4)

*

*

Campeonatos Internacionales de Tenis Femenino de Espana (Barcelona)

*

Maria Kirilenko def. Maria Jose Martinez Sanchez, 6-0 6-2

*

*

Ordina Open (s'Hertogenbosch)

*

David Ferrer def. Jesse Huta Galung, 6-2 6-3

Steve Darcis def. Florent Serra, 7-5 6-3

Mario Ancic def. Ivo Minar, 6-1 7-6 (7-0)

Rainer Schuettler def. Michael Berrer, 6-7 (4-7) 6-4 6-4

Igor Andreev def. Grigor Dimitrov, 6-1 6-3

Jurgen Melzer def. Victor Hanescu, 6-7 (11-13) 6-2 6-4

*

Camille Pin def. Elena Vesnina, 6-2 6-3

Halleback

Okay, I lied. I'm a bad person. One thing I didn't realise when I promised human interest stories is that you have to research them. I mean, I knew that, but I didn't realise how time consuming that would be. So, because I am in a hurry today, you just get the Musings of Jodi on Tennis She Hasn't Actually Seen. Tomorrow I have a whole day off, though... so I promise you faithfully a player profile. If there's anyone in particular you'd like me to profile, please leave a comment on my blog! I'm trying not to do Federer because I talk about him all the time... but it's always an option!

*

Speaking of Federer, he had a great win in Halle last night, taking out Michael Berrer. Berrer is hardly one of the Nadals of this world, but he's a tricky player - another southpaw - and Roger had a very dominating win by the looks of things. I read his presser from after the match, and he said he was feeling comfortable enough up 30-0, 40-0 on his serve to try stuff out - and he never got broken, so some of the stuff must have worked.

*

Every time I think I've encompassed the spectrum of Federer, he just gets that little bit better. His attitude after that crushing defeat in Roland Garros was... I don't think he could have a better attitude. Let me see if I can find the quote... it was from his pre-tournament presser in Halle... ah, here we go. “I am already over the loss in Paris. It does not matter if you lose by a big or a small margin. A loss is a loss. After all, I was in the final of the French Open, so I am happy about it.”

*

Isn't that just an incredible way to look at things? The world has endless things to learn from the way this man looks at life. Just after that awful loss on Sunday, a journalist asked him if he thought he could still win Roland Garros, and he fired back, "yes," immediately. He backs himself, he trusts himself and he doesn't let things get him down. A lot of people - and I include myself in this - have many lessons to learn from Roger Federer. I'm a member of a Facebook group called 'Roger Federer makes me better-er' and I couldn't believe that statement any more fervently. I swear.

*

Onto other guys. Rafa and the Djoker both won their matches in Queen's. Marat lost... but we know how he hates the grass, which he thinks is for cows. I know they're not particularly high ranked players, but I was very surprised at both Isner and Guccione losing in Queen's. Querrey lost the day before. I thought that enormous serve might help them out on the grass... but maybe, if the ball does come back, they don't have the footspeed to keep up with it. They are all about eleven feet tall, after all.

*

There's one last player I'd like to talk a bit about, and that's Tomas Berdych. I never to know what to think about him. In some ways, I think he's another Philipp Kohlschreiber to me (Philipp, incidentally, won yesterday.) I think he's better than he is, and so he perpetually underwhelms me. I know Soderling is crazy in form at the moment, but Berdych's game is so well suited to grass! He won Halle last year and was the runner up the year before! He's only young, but Tomas, man, wake up!

*

I really like Berdych's game - and time has allowed me to forgive him for beating Roger at the Olympics in 2004 - and so it's disappointing when he doesn't do as well as he should. I'd like to see him make a run to the semis in a slam - to be the other guy along with Roger, Rafa and the Djoker, as they basically seem to be locked into the semis of the Slams. I'd like him to be the random, the Tsonga, the Monfils, the Richou. He has the potential - actualise, Tomas, actualise!

*

I don't know if he's playing a tournament next week, but he should - Nottingham or something. A grass court tournament, obviously... still not sure what's going on with Warsaw and Barcelona and the clay. That's just weird.

*

Also, before I go, I'd just like to apologise for the horrendous pun in today's title. Not quite as bad as the Kuerten falling for Guga pun, but everyone was using variations on that. This one is all my own... ahahahaha.

*

*

Today's Results

*

Artois Championships (Queen's Club, London)

*

Rafael Nadal def. Jonas Bjorkman, 6-2 6-2

Kei Nishikori def. Olivier Patience, 7-6 (10-8) 6-3

Fernando Gonzalez def. Marat Safin, 6-3 7-6 (7-3)

Andy Roddick def. Robby Ginepri, 6-7 (6-8) 6-1 6-1

Mardy Fish def. Chris Guccione, 4-6 7-6 (7-0) 6-4

Ernests Gulbis def. Andreas Seppi, 6-3 6-7 (7-9) 6-3

Richard Gasquet def. Simone Bolelli, 6-3 6-3

Nicolas Mahut def. John Isner, 7-5 6-4

David Nalbandian def. Viktor Troicki, 6-4 7-6 (7-4)

Lleyton Hewitt def. Xavier Malisse, 6-3 6-2

Janko Tipsarevic def. Ivo Minar, 3-6 6-3 6-4

Novak Djokovic def. Roko Karanusic, 6-2 7-6 (9-7)

*

*

Gerry Weber Open (Halle)

*

Roger Federer def. Michael Berrer, 6-4 6-2

Philipp Kohlschreiber def. Tommy Haas, 7-5 5-7 7-6 (7-5)

Robin Soderling def. Tomas Berdych, 6-2 7-5

Andreas Beck def. Mischa Zverev, 6-7 (5-7) 7-6 (7-5) 6-1

James Blake def. Benjamin Becker, 4-6 7-5 6-3

*

*

Warsaw Orange Open (Warsaw)

*

Nikolay Davydenko def. Jiri Vanek, 4-6 7-5 6-1

Evgeny Korolev def. Potito Starace, 7-5 4-0 retired

Marcel Granollers def. Marcos Daniel, 6-2 6-4

Juan Monaco def. Florent Serra, 7-5 6-3

*

*

DFS Classic (Birmingham)

*

Petra Cetkovska def. Marion Bartoli, 5-7 6-4 6-0

Camille Pin def. Marta Domachowska, 6-4 6-2

Kateryna Bondarenko def. Samantha Stosur, 6-3 6-2

Melinda Czink def. Olga Govortsova, 6-3 7-6 (8-6)

Alona Bondarenko def. Virginia Ruano Pascual, 7-6 (7-4) 3-6 7-5

Sunitha Rao def. Naomi Cavaday, 4-6 6-3 6-1

Yaroslava Shvedova def. Katie O'Brien, 7-5 1-6 7-5

Marina Erakovic def. Sania Mirza, 6-3 6-0

Yanina Wickmayer def. Casey Dellacqua, 6-2 3-6 6-3

Aiko Nakamura def. Sorana Cirstea, 6-4 4-6 6-4

Nicole Vaidisova def. Nathalie Dechy, 6-1 6-3

*

*

Campeanatos Internacionales de Tenis Femenino de Espana (Barcelona)

*

Nuria Llagostera Vives def. Eloisa Compostizo de Andres, 6-3 6-0

Sara Errani def. Varvara Lepchenko, 6-4 7-5

Maria Jose Martinez Sanchez def. Pauline Parmentier, 6-2 6-4

Stephani Cohen-Aloro def. Magdalena Rybarikova, 7-6 (7-3) 6-0

What Makes A Champion

It will come as no surprise that I am bitterly, bitterly disappointed.

*

The match has only just finished, and it will equally come as no surprise that I am crying too hard to see my keyboard. So if there are any typos, that's why - I'm relying on my ability to touchtype. I wanted Roger to win so badly. So badly. It would have meant so much for him.

*

And for me.

*

I know I refused to call the final. But I think in many ways I refused to call the final because I did not want to admit the possibility, the probability that Roger (my Roger) would lose. I wanted him to win so, so badly. But Rafa was so dominant, so good, such a fabulous player.

*

I am glad that it is Rafa, and not anyone else, that has beaten my Roger. This loss, although it is hard to swallow, particularly with the breadstick and the bagel in there, is not as hard to swallow as the loss to Djokovic at the Australian. That does not make it easy by any means, but the pain is slightly less. And... to tell the truth, I think I knew Rafa would win.

*

And that makes me feel bad. No one believed in Roger - not even me. If I could have believed a little bit more, could have had a little bit more faith in him... would it have made a difference?

*

I know that it wouldn't have. My little blog is nothing compared to the vast, vast spectrum of the media. But I wish I could have believed in him that little bit more.

*

I realise that this is a sentiment that is usually more associated with religion than with sport. I am not a religious person whatsoever. Federer is my hero, not my god. And I know, that unlike a god, he is fallible. I don't think I would admire him, love him quite so much if he were not fallible. Part of the immense charm of Federer is that he can take a loss like a man. 'You should never take anything away from the other guy,' Roger once said (slightly paraphrased, possibly), 'because you know I was trying my best.'

*

The media were down on Roger. I wonder if that affected him? Because this is his worst loss at Roland Garros in a while. I cannot remember the last time Roger took a bagel. He wins the Golden Bagel all the time for bagelling other people, not for taking a bagel. I don't want to make excuses for him, because I know he will not make excuses for himself, but his head was not there today. What happened, Roger? Where did you go?

*

That said, Nadal played phenomenally. 46 winners to 7 unforced errors is absolutely insane. I can't remember the last time someone had such amazing stats. He emulated Federer's Australian Open 2007 feat of winning the tournament without losing a set. I am so, so sad. I cannot express how sad I am. But I do not want to take any credit away from Nadal.

*

If Rafa had been playing anyone else in the final, I would have wanted him to win. I would have gloried in this victory. But Roger... oh, Roger.

*

I know my writing is not the best right now. It never is, when I am crying so much... and the tears have not yet abated. Perhaps tomorrow, when the pain has subsided some, I can write about the match with some clarity. Because, yes, I do intend to continue this blog. I am going to write through Halle and Queen's and all the way through the end of Wimbledon (where I once again expect a Roger/Rafa final, but this time with a different result.) I don't know if I will focus heavily on those tournaments, because I have no way of seeing them live, but I can reflect on the results and perhaps profile some of the players I have talked about this season.

*

A word, before I go, on Rafa. I am so, so glad that he was the one that beat Roger, if it had to be anyone. He was such a gentleman in victory, and in some respects, he felt sad for Roger. (Though obviously not as sad as I felt, and nowhere near as sad as Roger felt.) I am glad that there is a man like Rafa about to stand behind the Federer throne, to dominate at Roland Garros. I like Rafa. I know I said I wouldn't be too disappointed if I won, and that is, to some extent, the truth. I wanted Roger to win so very, very badly - more than I have wanted anything for a long time now. History was on the line here. And I am bitterly, bitterly disappointed that he lost. But there is no one that can say Rafa did not deserve and earn this win. He is deservedly the 2008, Borg-emulating Roland Garros champion.

*

Congratulations, Rafa. May you vamos for many years to come.

*

I might write more about this final tomorrow, when I can actually see the keyboard... and when I am slightly more sober, because I drank a bottle of wine trying to cope with my nerves. But I would like to end with this. Roger Federer is not a champion because he has won Slams. I do not like Roger Federer because he has won Slams. I am a Federer fan because of the person he is, because of the ambassador he is for the sport, and for what he has brought me, the lessons I have learned from him and his attitude on the court. This may have been a tough loss, but Roger took it like a man. That is a lesson in and of itself. He is a great, great champion. There will never be a champion as profoundly excellent, on and off the court, as Roger Federer.

*

And so I will always be a Federer fan, come what may. Because no matter whether he wins or loses, Roger Federer is always a champion for me.

*

*

Roland Garros Results - Day #15

*

Men's Draw

*

Rafael Nadal def. Roger Federer, 6-1 6-3 6-0

Welcome to Thunder Dome

Two men enter. One man leaves.

*

Okay, the 'men' in question here are Ana Ivanovic and Dinara Safina, but the Mel Gibson reference still stands. There is no arena in modern sport so fiercely gladiatorial as that of a Grand Slam final. Two players enter, their only weapons their racquets, their skills and their minds. Only one can leave a champion.

*

In this case, it was Ana Ivanovic. I was going for Dinara Safina, and I really thought that she had the game to win, but Ivanovic really was due. A third Grand Slam final loss - especially a final she was expected to win - might have been catastrophic for her career, particularly as regards her mental stability. She hasn't been the strongest player mentally in the past, and the last thing she needed was a monkey on her back. And even though she is younger than Dinara, as a top-echelon tennis player I would make her senior, and it really was Ana's turn. This has been coming for a while.

*

Even though I was gunning for Dinara, I like Ana and I like the way she plays. It was always going to be interesting to see how she performed on this court after she froze up so totally against Justine last year. (Speaking of Justine, what the hell was she doing there? Wasn't the whole point of her retirement that she was sick of tennis? Or am I missing something? Go figure.) Both players started nervously - understandably. I wasn't surprised when Dinara dropped her first service game, and I wouldn't have been surprised if Ana had dropped hers. But no. She overcame it. She held on.

*

I take nothing away from Dinara Safina. She is a fine, fine player - as I have elaborated ad nauseam over the past few days! - and I think there are more Slam finals, and maybe even victories, in her future. I liked her chances today, because she has been so tough mentally over her past matches. And she was tough again today. But she was outplayed, short and simple. This match was always going to hang on Ivanovic's racquet, and on her nerves. She has bigger weapons than Dinara, but the test was her mind. She has been to two Slam finals (Roland Garros last year against Henin, and the Australian this year against Sharapova) and she has never yet won a set.

*

Until today.

*

It is only fitting, I suppose, that Ivanovic assume the heavy mantle of world number #1 with a Slam title to her name. With Justine gone, there are not many Slam winners in the top five (not compared to the men's game.) Sharapova has three, Kuznetsova has one, Dementieva has been to a final. Jankovic has never made it. It's a few places down to the Williamses, who have about fifteen between them. But now Ivanovic has one, and I would not be surprised to see her add more soon.

*

It will be interesting to see how Dinara backs up after this final, as well. She has moved into the top #10 on the rankings, and if she keeps her level of play up, she can move higher. Although she lost today, she has beaten three of those top five in this Slam. Sharapova, Dementieva and Kuznetsova all fell to her, and Dinara has really showed that she has got guts and nerves. She might not have broken through as early as Marat, with his US Open win as a teenager in 2000, but if Dinara can accept her loss and see her run to the final as what it really is - totally magnificent - she is going to be something else. I would not be surprised to see Dinara making an assault on the top five come the hardcourt season. In fact, she only has second round points to defend at Wimbledon - if she can translate her awesome claycourt game to the grass (which is certainly possible - we have seen Rafa Nadal do something like it in the past two years) - she can totally launch herself up there now. Ivanovic may have won today, but she might have to start watching her back - Dinara's a-coming.

*

Actually, on a bit of an aside, I would love to see Dinara play mixed doubles with her brother at Wimbledon. I don't know if the chances of that are very high, but I think they'd be a good duo... although they might destroy a record number of racquets between them.

*

But today belongs to Ivanovic. She is the one who left Philippe Chatrier (aka Thunder Dome) crowned champion and world number #1. She is, in my mind, the favourite to win Wimbledon - to do a Borg, as it were. Ana Ivanovic deserves this win.

*

The person I really feel sorry for is Jelena Jankovic, to tell the truth. She's a wonderful player, one of the finest that Serbia has ever produced... and she had to be around at the same time as Ivanovic, who is younger, and has beat her to the punch when it comes to winning a Slam and becoming world number #1. But we can't say it wasn't like Jelena didn't have her chances. She looked a cert to make it through to the final in the third set of her semi against Ana. But it was Ana who rose to the occasion, and it is Ana Ivanovic who is now, undoubtedly, the world number #1 for women's tennis.

*

I don't think there can be any doubt that the two girls who reached the final thoroughly deserved to be there. Dinara, after her run at Berlin and her constant presence in the round of sixteen and the quarters, was due a breakthrough, and she has been one of the form players this season. And Ivanovic demolished her opponents before she was tested by Jankovic - a test she passed by showing the grit and the nerve of a champion and not just the instincts of a frontrunner. So congratulations, Dinara. Congratulations, Ana. I think we'll be seeing these two meet in Thunder Dome again.

*

*

Roland Garros Results - Day #14

*

Women's Draw

*

Ana Ivanovic def. Dinara Safina, 6-4 6-3

Destiny

It was inevitable.

*

It was inexorable. It was irresistible. It was fate.

*

It was destiny.

*

Even before the tournament, everyone knew who was going to clash in the final. Rafael Nadal, #2 in the world, greatest claycourter who has ever lived, undefeated at Roland Garros, seeking to emulate Bjorn Borg. And Roger Federer, the most transcedent player in history, the most dominant player in history, arguably the greatest player in history, who no longer plays against opponents, but against history, the measure of his own greatness.

*

Destiny.

*

I got my wish last night. I've been rabbiting on and on about how Rafa Nadal needs to teach the upstart Novak Djokovic some respect, and if he didn't do it in that semi final, I don't know what he did. He crushed Djokovic - totally obliterated him. Djokovic staged a mini comeback to bring that third set to a breaker, but Nadal owned that match from start to finish. It was too little, too late for Novak. Rafa owned him - and showed him why he is #2, and Novak is #3.

*

They were talking about Rafa on Radio Roland Garros the other day - I think it was during his match against Almgaro - and they said that he is not only the best player in the wolrd on clay, but he is a 'claycourt boss.' This struck me as oddly appropriate, especially considering my stance in the Federer camp. I've never been one for video games and Playstations and whatnot (and yes, I realise that that last sentence made me sound approximately 844 years old!) but I remember watching my little brothers play them. At the end of every level, or every few levels, there'd be a 'boss' - a sort of super opponent that the hero had to overcome to ascend to the next level.

*

I believe that Federer has already proved himself to be the greatest player of all time, but there are many who believe he still needs the Coupe de Mousquetaires in his trophy cabinet to cement it. If he wins, if he, the hero, can overcome Rafa, the claycourt boss, then I don't think there will be a person in the world who can doubt his claim to be the best player to ever pick up a racquet.

*

That said, he has an uphill road ahead of him. Rafa has been playing sublime tennis. Much as I don't like Djokovic, he is a decent player, and it ain't just everyone who can bundle him out of a Slam in three straight sets. Federer's semi against Monfils was much more scratchy. Federer came through, which is the important thing - as long as you win, it doesn't matter how you do it, in my book - but he was less convincing.

*

Gael Monfils is a strange player. I follow the Russians, especially Safin and Tursunov, and so I understand how a player can run hot and cold, but he takes it to extremes. I have never known a player who can suck so totally one moment and then be so brilliant the next. I sent in a question to Radio Roland Garros the other night, asking who they thought was the most naturally gifted players on the circuit. Both said Federer without skipping a beat - which was the answer I was fishing for! - but it would be interesting to see who these tennis professionals rank next. Federer is the most gifted on the tour, no doubt about it, but it seems to me that Monfils has an obscene amount of talent which has never been actualised. (The same goes for Richard Gasquet, but to a lesser extent.) Sadly for Gael, I don't know if it ever will be, despite his excellent run here: he gets injured too easily to be a constant presence in the top echelons of tennis, as his career up to this point demonstrated,

*

But the semi finals are over now. Djokovic and Monfils have faded into the background, with the other players who have lost this week. Of one hundred and twenty eight men, two remain. Roger Federer. Rafael Nadal. The titans of the game.

*

In some respects, it is such a shame that these two great players had to exist at the same time. Without Rafa, Roger would have won certainly the last two and maybe the last three Roland Garroses, which would have given him the Grand Slam two years in a row and have put him past the Pete Sampras Slam record. Without Roger, Rafa would have won a couple of Wimbledons and would have been #1 - and a dominant one - a long time ago. Outside the claycourt season, I feel Rafa is underrated, but if he were not living in the shadow of Federer, then I don't think that'd be the case.

*

But they do exist at the same time. Roger stands between Rafa and Bjorn Borg's record, Rafa stands between Roger and history. This title is so important for both of them, and they both deserve it.

*

This is why, even though I want Roger to win so badly, I am not going to pick a winner for this match. No one can doubt the might and the dominance on clay of Rafa Nadal - who has grown up and become a lovely young man, and Federer's friend. I talked about this a few days ago, but I think there is a period in every Federer fan's life when they hate Rafa for being the roadblock on Roger's road to greatness, on being the 'boss' that Roger just can't quite get past, but to view Rafa just as a roadblock is very disrespectful. Rafa Nadal is a great ambassador for the sport, and I'm glad that he and Federer get along so well, because tennis needs men like these.

*

It is only fitting that these two meet in the final. If Federer is to win Roland Garros, it is only fitting that he beats Nadal to do it. If Nadal is to win his fourth title in a row, it is only fitting that he overcome the best possible opponent to do it.

*

It is destiny.

*

I make no bones of it - I want Federer to win. I will be cheering for my Roger with everything I have. But if Rafa were to win, that wouldn't be so bad either. If there is ever time when it is understandable to lose a tennis match, it is against Rafa Nadal in his playground, at Roland Garros (or, looking ahead, against Roger Federer on the green grass of Wimbledon.) Whichever man wins it, they will have deserved it, and even though Federer will always come first for me, I admire them both greatly.

*

*

Roland Garros Results - Day #13

*

Men's Draw

*

Roger Federer def. Gael Monfils, 6-2 5-7 6-3 7-5

Rafael Nadal def. Novak Djokovic, 6-4 6-2 7-6 (7-3)

Champion Nouveau

Dinara Safina, here's looking at you, kid.

*

She is, in my mind, the story of the tournament. Forget Gael Monfils and his Marcos/Jo-W-like run to the semis. It's all about Dinara. Hell, she is the story of the claycourt season. In years to come, she'll be a Trivial Pursuit question: 'who defeated Justine Henin in her last ever professional match?' It was Dinara. Her streak, from Berlin through to the final here, has included wins over two world #1s in Henin and Sharapova. She has taken out Kuznetsova, Serena Williams, Azarenka, Dementieva (twice). Dinara Safina is a force to be reckoned with, and she is declaring herself.

*

Everyone was talking about what a great run Dinara had had, but was pretty sure she couldn't back it up against Kuznetsova. I did it too - I think yesterday I was going with Sveta from the head, but Dinara from the gut. But I picked Dinara, and I was right. There was never, ever a moment in this match when Sveta looked like winning. The match hung on Dinara's racquet, and she rose to the occasion magnificently.

*

Sveta certainly did not play as well as she is capable of, and that is very sad for her. She was the only remaining person in the women's draw to have won a Grand Slam title, so now whoever wins the final is going to be a first-time Slam winner, which is going to be great. I'm not really into women's tennis - on the whole, I don't think it's as interesting as men's - but maybe I'll start following it a bit more closely now. Maybe what I really lacked was a champion. On the men's side, I have always had Federer. I was a Federer fan before I was a tennis fan! But on the women's side, there have been players I've liked (Petrova, for example, and, back in the day, Hingis) but I've never had one that I follow like I follow Federer.

*

Well, Dinara, get ready, because I think I'm throwing my weight behind you.

*

I have liked every little thing about the way Dinara has played this week. She has been let down by her mental toughness in the past, but that is no longer in question. You don't come back from match point down IN TWO SEPARATE MATCHES without having a little somethin' somethin' going on upstairs. Her shots against Sveta today were sweet - the forehand especially, which she crunched like nothing else. I've said it before, but I'll say it again: Dinara Safina is not just Marat Safin's kid sister any more.

*

Can she win the final, against Ana Ivanovic - who will be #1 in the world come the new rankings on Monday? Can she add yet another scalp to her already impressive collection?

*

Yes, she can.

*

That's my pick. That's what I'm saying. I'm calling it. Dinara Safina, Roland Garros Champion for 2008.

*

Speaking of Ivanovic, what a bizarre match that match between her and Jankovic was. First Jankovic was destroying her, then Ivanovic was suddenly striking it superbly, then Jankovic was destroying her again, then it was a struggle and the Match of a Thousand Breaks. It is sad, really, that one of these girls had to lose... especially as it'll be such an ego blow for Jankovic. Ivanovic is younger, and she made #1 first. Ivanovic won the Serbian National Championships here, and Jankovic can only stand in her shadow.

*

I'm sure Jelena's time will come. But it must be very frustrating for her.

*

I don't follow the women's game very much, so I don't know, but is Ana always so streaky? She had an amazing hot streak of about ten games in the latter half of the first set and the first half of the second set, then she totally went off the boil and let Jelena back into it. She's not going to stay #1 for a very long time if she doesn't play a little more consistently... but for all I know, she might do, and this match might be an anomaly. Ana and Jelena must know each other's games pretty well, hence the numerous breaks of serve.

*

So, regardless of the result on Saturday, Ana Ivanovic is the new #1 for the women's draw. Sharapova falls to #2, Jelena and Sveta are solid at #3 and #4, and Dinara skips into #9. It will be interesting to see how this stands after Wimbledon. Wimbledon traditionally favours a different kind of player, because the grass courts are lightning fast. The finalists last year were Venus Williams and Marion Bartoli, but judging by present form, I don't think we're going to see either there - especially Bartoli, who has been playing dreadfully of late. We might see Serena do well. Ana, as well, will be a big threat. It will be interesting to see how my new champion Dinara does - how will she adjust to the faster game of Wimbledon? I think she'll rise to the occasion with aplomb, but only time will tell. It is, of course, totally irrelevant that her brother Marat hated it - anyone else remember his 'grass is for cows, I'm never coming back' speech? - because Dinara and Marat are DIFFERENT players. Oh yeah.

*

The Nadal/Djokovic showdown is first up tonight, followed by Roger versus La Monf. I can't remember ever cheering for Rafa in a semi - I've always been feverishly hoping he'll get knocked out so Federer will have a better chance of winning the tournament... which is bad sportsfanmanship. But oh! how I am cheering for Rafa tonight. The #2 ranking is on the line, and Rafa is going to pound Djokovic and his arrogance INTO THE GROUND. It is only right that this final is between Roger and Rafa. I said yesterday I didn't want to throw around words like 'destiny' but that's pretty much what it is. We have the same set up as the Australian Open semis - Roger, Rafa, Novak and some random French guy. But this time, Novak and the random French guy are going NO FURTHER.

*

The standard and difficulty of the Roger/La Monf match will be determined by how well La Monf plays. He is notoriously streaky. Roger might have to weather the storm in some instances, like he did with Gonzalez. But there is no doubt in my mind that my Roger will come out on top.

*

And there is no doubt in my mind that Rafa will DESTROY Djokovic, and teach him some respect.

*

And there is no doubt in my mind that Dinara Safina can win the French Open. Davai Dinara!

*

*

Roland Garros Results - Day #12

*

Women's Draw

*

Dinara Safina def. Svetlana Kuznetsova, 6-3 6-2

Ana Ivanovic def. Jelena Jankovic, 6-4 3-6 6-4

Conquistador

When Rafael Nadal won the Roland Garros final against Roger Federer last year, I distinctly remember the Roland Garros commentator being able to say nothing more than, "Rafa Nadal, Rafa Nadal, Rafa Nadal." I was very preoccupied at the time with being sad about Federer losing, and so they might have said other stuff that I've forgotten about, but that one stayed with me. I pictured the commentator sitting there and shaking his head in disbelief at what this twenty-one year old had done. Because, as we often forget, Rafa is very young. He's been around forever, but today was his birthday: his twenty-second birthday. Rafael Nadal, three time Grand Slam champion, most dominant #2 player ever and arguably the greatest claycourter of all time, is younger than I am. (By less than a year, sure - but if you compare what I have achieved in my life to what Rafa has, the difference is pretty pronounced!)

*

People are always talking about the 'Big Three' in men's tennis: Federer, Nadal and Djokovic, and about how Djokovic is rising so fast and about how Federer had better watch his back. If one of these three tennis players could be called the forgotten member of the Big Three, it's definitely Nadal. When he was the only real challenger to the Federer dominance, people were talking about him all the time. Now that there's a new guy, people tend to forget about Rafa a little bit.

*

They shouldn't. No one should ever, ever forget about Rafa Nadal.

*

I am, above all things, a Federer fan, and I think there has been a point in every Federer fan's life where they have hated Rafa with a fiery passion. I know I used to dislike him vehemently, especially in 2006, when Federer's emotional victory at the Australian Open turned me from a person who liked tennis into an avid follower. This was the claycourt season when, for the first time, it seemed like Roger had a real chance at winning the Slam. One man stood in his way. Rafa Nadal. And that kid is some roadblock.

*

It is not Novak Djokovic who has stopped Federer winning the Slam. There has only ever been one man who can claim to have stopped the inexorable Fed-Express. Rafa Nadal.

*

These were the days when Rafa, who was very young, nineteen, twenty, used to celebrate like a crazy monkey on court when he won, after every point, whether it was a winner or a mistake of the opponent. For me, attracted to the calm, gentlemanlike demeanour of Federer, this was the nail in Rafa's coffin. 'Vamos' was possibly my least favourite word - after maybe Lleyton's interminable 'c'mon.' And then there was the constant, smothering presence of Uncle Toni - so smothering that even Federer, the eternal sportsman, accused him of oncourt coaching.

*

But then something happened. Rafa grew up.

*

As one of the top players in the world, it is Rafa's duty to be a statesman and a spokesperson for tennis. In those early days, when he was just a big kid, dancing around and Vamosing on court, there was the phenomenon of 'Rafamania,' but there were also an equal amount of people that disliked him. But over the years, we have seen Rafa mature incredibly. He has assumed the mantle of statesman, as international representative for tennis, calmed down, cooled down, and dug his heels in. Often, those crazy-monkey celebrators, the precocious kids, are flashes in the pan.

*

Not Rafa.

*

This kid is here to stay.

*

I'm not sure when I started liking Rafa. Early last year sometime, maybe. It was, like Rafa's growing up, such a gradual process that I barely noticed it happening. But Rafael Nadal is an excellent role model, in my opinion, for young tennis players. He is a brilliant player. He has held down that #2 spot for 150 weeks now. He has won three Roland Garroses and reached two Wimbledon finals. And he is still humble, still real. This is the boy who brought his mother as his date to the Laureus Awards. This is the boy who still lives in the same building as his family when he is at home in Mallorca. This is the boy who never assumes, never makes excuses, and can take it like a man when he loses.

*

I could go on a tangent here and say that this attitude is the result of the influence of Federer on the game as well as Rafa, but to place Federer in the role of Obi-Wan might be taking away a little from Rafa. Federer has been an excellent influence on the game in terms of humility and decorum, but Rafa got where he is all by himself. You can't count Rafa out, can't brush him aside. Ever.

*

I often say that Novak Djokovic has got some lessons to learn from Roger Federer. He has some to learn from Rafa Nadal, too.

*

These two will meet in the semi finals of Roland Garros. The #2 ranking is on the line. Djokovic comes into it off a good tournament, though his quarter final against Ernests Gulbis was a struggle at worst, and scratchy at best - a match that went over three hours. Rafael Nadal is coming off five matches where he has conceded only twenty five games. His opponent in the quarter finals, Nicolas Almagro, has been described as a claycourt bandito. He leads the circuit this year with the most wins on clay, including titles at Acapulco and Costa do Sauipe. Rafa himself conceded that Almagro is someone that could beat him on clay.

*

Today, the third of June 2008, on his twenty-second birthday, Rafa Nadal beat Nicolas Almagro 6-1 6-1 6-1.

*

I won't lie. I desperately want Roger Federer to win this year's French Open, to complete the set of Slams for his career, to fill that missing spot on his trophy shelf. But if Rafa Nadal wins, for the fourth year in the row, then I don't think I'll be that disappointed - because there is nobody, NOBODY, that can say this kid doesn't deserve it.

*

Happy birthday, Rafa.

*

*

Roland Garros Results - Day #10

*

Men's Draw

*

Rafael Nadal def. Nicolas Almagro, 6-1 6-1 6-1

Novak Djokovic def. Ernests Gulbis, 7-5 7-6 (7-3) 7-5

*

*

Women's Draw

*

Ana Ivanovic def. Patty Schnyder, 6-3 6-2

Jelena Jankovic def. Carla Suarez Navarro, 6-3 6-2

Svetlana Kuznetsova def. Victoria Azarenka, 6-2 6-3

Kaia Kanepi def. Petra Kvitova, 6-3 3-6 6-1

Tribute to a Fallen Hero

I am destroyed.

*

I am sitting with my laptop on my lap as I write this, and I had to retype the previous sentence about seven times because I am shaking with sobs. I'm trying hard not to cry onto the keyboard, but I can't help it. I am destroyed. I am destroyed.

*

Of all the people to lose to, why Djokovic? Why Novak Djokovic? When Federer loses to Nadal, it's hard to take, but Rafa is lovely, so I can come to terms with it in the end. When he loses to randoms like Volandri and Canas, it's hard, but I can get over it.

*

But not Djokovic. Not Djokovic.

*

Novak Djokovic rubs me up the wrong way. There's an arrogance about him that makes me grit my teeth. This was supposed to be a beating, like the fourth round of the Open last year, when Djokovic was shooting off his mouth and Federer put him in his place. I don't know what happened.

*

Well, I do know what happened. Djokovic beat Federer, fair and square. There is no question that Djokovic was the better player tonight. I don't want to make excuses for Federer, since he never does for himself, but that was not the Federer of Grand Slams past out there. That was the Federer that has walked out to face Rafael Nadal in the final of Roland Garros for the past two years, the Federer with fear. Or at least so it seemed to me. Because Federer, even if he was trying his best (which he will undoubtedly say in his interviews) did not play his best out there. He was inhibited, playing within himself, letting Djokovic pin him to the baseline, rarely coming in, not mixing it up, and worst of all (for him) his forehand, the best shot ever in men's tennis, failed him. He made a ridiculous amount of unforced errors compared to his usual. And he was not Federer the frontrunner. When he was frontrunning, he dropped back. He... wasn't there.

*

Or maybe he was. But he... this was Roger, but it was not the normal Roger.

*

I noted a while back that he was over-vocalising in some of his matches, against Blake especially. He was almost under-vocalising in this one. For the first two and a half sets, he was silent. And Djokovic played crazy-good. He's really been the form player in this tournament - even though I dislike him immensely, I cannot deny it - and he came out all guns blazing. Much as I hate him, I have to say it: Djokovic deserved to win this match.

*

Though that doesn't mean I won't be gunning for Tsonga with every inch of my being come Sunday night. Or that I'll stop crying anytime soon.

*

It's easy to hitch yourself to a star. To pick a player and follow them because they win, and so you're rarely disappointed. To be, essentially, a fairweather fan. I'm sure, through no fault of his own, Roger has lost a fan or two tonight. Likewise, I'm sure Djokovic has gained some. Everyone loses sometimes. Everyone wins sometimes. And I'm sure this isn't the beginning of some massive downward slump for Federer or anything like that. Djokovic or no, he is still the greatest player in history. He has won twelve Slam titles and countless other accolades, and no one can take that away.

*

But watching Federer lose brings back into sharp focus, for me, why I admire him so much. It is not because he wins, but because he is such a great ambassador for the sport. Watching him play - though not tonight, obviously - is like watching poetry in motion. But that is not why he is so wonderful.

*

Can you imagine a better man to be a spokesperson for tennis - or, indeed, anything? He is charming, clever, a polyglot, and above all, really, really nice. This is a man who represents sportsmanship in its purest forms: he never denigrates an opponent, whether he wins or loses. He will never take away an opponent's triumph. He resists his beatification as a virtual tennis saint. He is, by his own admission, 'just Roger' and what he brings is 'all he's got.' He is humble. He is real. And yes, I love it when he wins, and it destroys me when he doesn't. But that doesn't change anything.

*

This man is still the greatest tennis player to have ever played. And, more importantly, he is possibly the most wonderful man ever to pick up a racquet, in all aspects of his life. Win, lose, retire, that will never change. You can take a victory away from Federer, but nothing will ever take away what Federer is. He is the greatest. He is the most tremendous athlete of our age. He is the model to which all sportspeople should aspire. And moreover, he is an excellent example of humility and fair play - qualities which are relevant not only in tennis but in life.

*

Erin suggested to me that I write an article about life lessons I have learned from Roger Federer. The first lesson? Winning isn't everything. And when you lose, you have to take it on the chin, and then move on.

*

Djokovic will get his dues. And if he wins the Open, congratulations. But at this point in his career, he is not half the man Roger Federer is. And until he has proved to me that he has these qualities, this inner strength... Roger has still won.

*

This is one fan Roger Federer has not lost, and will never lose, because he is, quite simply, a champion, on and off the court, in tennis and in life.

*

*

Australian Open Results - Day 12

*

Men's Draw

*

Novak Djokovic def. Roger Federer, 7-5 6-3 7-6 (7-5)