When he played that 2007 US Open final against Novak Djokovic, he’d just turned 26. (Born August 8, 1981) I took him for granted in these prime years. We’re so used to speaking of his elegance and shot-making, but that narrative was cemented by him in his 30s and 40s, when his anticipation and variety hid the downtick in the savagery of his athleticism. You have to go back that far to find Novak Djokovic out of sorts. Roger was behind the whole time, but he knew the younger Djokovic would crack. This title was during his run of 5 consecutive US Open championships. When he lost to his rival and good friend Rafa Nadal at Wimbledon in 2008, Federer was contending for his sixth title there, consecutive. Remember that he won again on the grass in 2012, and again in 2017 (!). Even so, he lost 3 times to Djokovic there, culminating at Wimbledon 2019, at age 38, when he needed just one more shot to win his 9th title at the All England Club. The GOAT argument cannot be settled, and it never will, because veteran Federer was like a real-life Rocky movie.
Just watch the tape of this. Against all but the very best, young Roger was like fighting peak Ali in the ring. You’re probably gonna feel depressed and hopeless. If he weren’t unfailingly kind, he’d have been despised. Let Andy Roddick tell you how pointless it was, trying to play him, but trying to manufacture a dislike that would propel you to victory. Roddick is probably Roger’s biggest cheerleader today. Because Roger is a guy who texts the guy he just beat at the pinnacle of the sport, to let him know that he knows the pain of effort and the sorrow of losing. And he’s here if you want to talk. Andy Roddick was the best in the world, number 1 ranked and the last American to win a major championship, 23 years ago. He’s not some charming underdog who made good. He’d embarrass even solid pros 5 or 10 spots down. He’s a legend in his own right. It’s hard to explain it. But Federer, Djokovic, and Nadal created peaks never seen. They spoiled us; they’ve hidden from us the difficulty and brutality of the sport by the magnitude of their dominance.
Djokovic at 39 has few peers. What, he’s past it because he can’t beat the Ali and Frazier of this decade, Carlos Alcaraz and Jannik Sinner? C’mon, man! I don’t even root for him, but I know he can trounce the rest of the top 30. I don’t think a more ruthless meritocracy exists than professional tennis. Roger Federer is fully 45, nearly retired 4 full years. One coach said Federer could beat 80 percent of the top 100 today, with no practice. If we credit Federer for being the only peer for the great Djokovic all the way until his 40th birthday, how great is Djokovic? The young generation can’t stay with him, save those top 2, both injured in turn, allowing Alex Zverev, a criminally underrated German nearly 30, to win two majors this year.
I have said before that Carlos Alcaraz is like a frightening combination of the three legends of the recent golden age. Sinner meanwhile looks in real time like a VHS tape on fast forward. You don’t need to be the fastest to be the best, but it helps, doesn’t it?
Time marches on, but it remains for the experienced to teach the young reverence for the game, and to revere those who brought it here.
Comments