Confidence Game by TOM PERROTTA on tennis.com
When you open your newspapers this morning, you'll undoubtedly read about the end of the Federer era, which allegedly passed before our eyes in three sets Friday evening, all of them won by Novak Djokovic, 7-5, 6-3, 7-6(5).
The match, if you haven't seen it, wasn't complicated or ever in doubt. Djokovic didn't play his best except for a stretch in the second set, but he was steady and smart throughout. He moved well. He was firm on important points; in the second set, he hit a backhand around the net post on break point for a 3-1 lead. But the fact that Federer didn't move well was the most noticeable element of the match. The man who usually glides, sometimes so quickly that the ball and his opponent look frozen in time, was a step slower than usual, and so came the forehand errors and the missed chances, none more significant than a 0-40 break opportunity in the second game of the third set. Djokovic kept his nerve and served beautifully. Against most players, Federer can win when he's not at his best. Djokovic is no longer one of those players.
The ins and outs of this particular match don't interest me too much, however. The bigger question is, "Should you believe what you read" about the Federer Era? Are those shocking headlines correct? Dijana Djokovic, Novak's mother, hopes so.
"He has been no. 1 for four years, with all respect, and now there are young kids, Novak, Murray, Tsonga," she said as she and her husband, Srdjan, soaked up the moment in the player's restaurant. "So it's time for change. We came here to win this tournament. I think if Novak is playing how he can play, it will be easy--not easy, I can't say easy, but he will win."
Confidence runs strong in the Djokovic family and in tennis, we all know, confidence is a must. This boy has believed since he was a child and hasn't been shy about telling us all about it the past few years. Still, I'd argue that the above words are more a mother's pride (and well-earned pride at that) than the truth of the matter. Rather than signifying something earth shattering, Djokovic's win tonight highlighted something that would have been the case even if Federer had won this tournament. We are now in the third stage of Federer's career, if for no other reason than his age (he'll be 27 in August). He's gone from a wildly talented teenager who couldn't figure out how to win an important title, to the most dominant champion the sport has ever known, to a champion who now must beat back a number of talented players who are not afraid of him. Will he win more majors? Of course. More intelligent, I think, to ask, "How many more?"
Federer has set the bar impossibly high the last five years. He has won 12 major titles. He hasn't lost before the semifinals in a major since the 2004 French Open, which was also the last time he lost in straight sets in a major. Before tonight, he had won 34 consecutive semifinal matches (all tournaments). He had reached the final of 10 consecutive majors, breaking Jack Crawford's 1933-34 record by four. Last year he won three majors and lost nine matches--a better year than Pete Sampras ever had in his career--and people talked as if Federer had come down a level. I could go on and on into the night about the absurdity of his accomplishments and how those accomplishments are viewed, typing until my fingers go numb or bleed, but like any good journalist, I'm obligated to make it back to the bar before last call.
Federer has said in the past that he didn't expect to keep up this pace, but for the first time that I can recall, he described his feats--the enormity of his accomplishments--as a burden of sorts.
"I'll definitely reflect on what happened," he said. "You know, I mean, considering, you know, my illness, I'm sort of happy with the result here. Of course, I've created a monster, so I know I need to always win every tournament."
He continued: "Well, winning every other week, you know, lose a set and people say I'm playing bad. So it's my own mistake, I guess."
Obviously, Federer is aware of his place in history and the chance he has to put everyone else who has ever played this game behind him. I haven’t heard him talk about the pressures involved in that challenge--the pressures of being Roger Federer--in this way.
This loss was important in another way: it's the first time something out of Federer's control has impeded him at a major event. He has remained remarkably healthy over the years, largely because of hard work. This year, however, he caught a stomach virus before the tournament began. I didn't think he had suffered any long term effects from that illness--and the hiccup in his preparation--until the last two matches, against Tomas Berdych and James Blake. Federer didn't move as well as he usually does. Arnaud Boetsch, the former French pro who sat in Federer's box tonight, said the virus had taken its toll.
"I just arrived a few days ago but against James Blake, already I felt that he was a bit behind the ball, he was not moving so fast, forehand is always a bit late," Boetsch said. "And today it was, I don't want to say worse, but you can see it because Djokovic is really on the ball, is a fighter, is a control player. Usually [Federer] is flying on the court. Remember when he won the U.S. Open or this kind of event? He's just flying, he's everywhere."
Federer didn't take flight tonight. But I'm guessing it won't be long before he does again. Until then, applaud the first first-time Grand Slam title winner--either Djokovic or Jo-Wilfried Tsonga--since Rafael Nadal won his first French Open in 2004.
**a very uplifting work written by a very concerned journalist. At least, there's someone left with insights like this..** (.^__^.)
0 comments:
Post a Comment