Aussie Open 2007: what a ride!

The 2007 Australian Open was, for me, a story about the game's two best athletes showing the world what they're made of — Roger Federer and Serena Williams, two Grand Slam veterans at ripe old age of 25. The way they each dominated in their final is a testament to their skills and fierce desire to win. But the differences between the manner in which they go about making their living and their mark is striking.

Roger Federer, the clear favorite among the men, came into the Aussie Open (Oz) poised to surpass Jimmy Connors on the consecutive-weeks at-number 1 list, leaving only Ivan Lendl and Pete Sampras standing on a higher rung. Holder of 45 ATP tour titles, including nine Grand Slam titles, three Year-End Championships (Masters Cups) and 12 Masters Series events, his story was about whether he would continue to demonstrate the greatness we've come to expect and perhaps, take for granted. Inevitably, the talk at Oz, as everywhere he now plays, was whether Roger Federer would move one step closer to claiming the title of Greatest Of All Time (aka GOAT), or whether the pressure would overwhelm him as he succumbed to one of the hungry young lions, such as Rafael Nadal or Andy Murray, both of whom had beaten him in 2006. Or would Andy Roddick, working with Jimmy Connors to "close the gap" between himself and Roger, be able to build on his near-upset of Federer at the 2006 Masters Cup in Shanghai and his straight-sets exhibition win over the world's number 1 in Kooyong. To put it more succinctly, the story was whether Federer could live up to his own, and our, expectations.

When the curtain was pulled back at Oz, it revealed a real champion and man on a mission, an athlete as large in life as the image the tennis world projects of him. A man who has coe to appreciate his moment with a grace and humility that harkens back to the champions of old. He deigned to predict his title run, giving much air time in his run to the final to how well each of his opponents had been playing and how nervous he would be entering their match. Federer spoke o Roddick's improvements since his run at Cincinnati, and the fear his huge serve instilled. He spoke of Gonzalez's new-found judiciousness, and the effectiveness of his ballistic forehand. All this made for high drama going into each match; the expectations were set for some real throw-downs. But in the end, Federer threw down the hype and dispensed with his opponents, all seven of them, in straight sets. His only real scare came from Gonzalez, who held a double-set point serving 5-4, 40-15 in the first set of the final.

In the past, Gonzalez might be counted on to go for broke on both points, hoping to pull something special from his bag of tricks. Instead, he played within himself on the first point, staying back and looking forthe right opportunity to unleash the monster forehand. I was Federer who took the risk and came in behind an approach to the Gonzalez backhand. Gonzo hit a very respectable dipping pass at the left hip of Federer, who blocked it into the deuce-court corner. On the dead run, Gonzo had a split second to make the right play. He chose to go for the cross-court dipping pass, but his attempt didn't go quite far enough cross court and it sat up a bit for Federer to block into the open court — one set point gone, 40-30 Gonzalez. Had Gonzo curled his forehand down the line, which would have been more in keeping with his high-risk mentality of old, he might well have passed Federer outright or gotten a volley that he could have punched past Roger for the set.

On the 40-30 point, the two men exchanged backhands until Federer took the initiative and found the sharp angle to the ad court. Gonzo elected to run around that shot and, with one foot in and one foot outside the doubles alley, send a forehand bullet down the line for the set. But he missed into the net, and the game as sent to deuce. What was telling in these pivotal moments was that Federer took the initiative and played pre-emptive strike tennis, aproaching the net on the first of the two set points, and opening up the court with the angled backhand in the second. Gonzalex was left playing reactive tennis, which is not the game he wanted to play against Federer.

It was like this throughout the tounrament, although Federer clearly stepped up his attacks in the final in order to stymie Gonzalez's devastating striking power. By taking the initiative and playing pre-emptive strike tennis, Federer took away Gonzalez' one hope of winning, which was to wait for a ball he could drill and seize that moment, taking Roger out of the play quickly and decisively. But Roger turned the tables, showing again why he is the best player in the game and how he finds ways to widen the gap between himself and the rest of the field.

On the women's side, the story took some time to develop. First there was the talk of Justine Henin-Hardenne's withdrawal due to family matters, opening the door for Grand Slam champions Amelie Mauresmo and Maria Sharapova. Then there was Kim Clijsters and her farewell tour — would she, could she, finally hoist the trophy in her adoptive home? With Davenport effectively retired, Venus Williams out with a wrist injury, and Serena out of shape and out of practice, the road to glory seemed set for one of the young warriors -- the hard-hitting 17-year-old Nicole Vaidisova from the Czech Republic, the athletic Ana Ivanovic of Serbia, or the fearlessly confident Jelena Jankovic of Croatia. Or perhaps the talented Nadia Petrova, the best player in the women's field to have never won a Slam, would finally have her day in the sun.

Serena defeated seeded Mara Santangelo in the first round, Mauresmo was ousted in the fourth, and Ivanovic self-destructed. Serena then roared back from the brink of defeat to dismantle the heavily favored Petrova in three sets. And that's when the tournament was decided — right then and there. But of course, no one knew it yet but Serena. She had found her desire, her insatiable hunger to win, to prove wrong all the doubters and naysayers who had said she was not fit enough to play the tournament in the Aussie summer sun, let alone be a serious threat to win. She then took down Jankovic quickly in two in the fourth round and staved off an emboldened Shahar Peer in the quarterfinals. The teenager from Israel played fearless tennis against the mighty lioness for three sets, more fight than anyone lse had been able to muster. If that win caused some to double their bets against Serena, it onlycaused Serena to redouble her efforts in the semifinal against Vaidisova, whose power Serena in turns absorbed and reflected to walk away a two-sets victor.

Set to face the hard-hitting Sharapova in the final, the lioness could sense the moment was ripe for a quick kill. Serena came out ready to do battle. She maintained a focus and intensity from the first point onward that the world has rarely seen from her. Normally a towering, if slender, figure on the court, Sharapova looked like a shrinking violet next to the super-pumped Serena. Dozens of points ended with one swing of Serena's racquet. One strangely telling statistic from the match was the relative few unforced errors from Sharapova. She simply never got a chance to touch the ball, as Serena pounced on shot after shot after shot, and served ace after ace. Serving for the match, Serena hit two 122 mph aces to earn her first and only match point at 40-love, at which time she went for an ace to the wide sideline in the ad court, barely missing. On her secind delivery, Serena went for the ace up the T, clocking it at over 100 mh and forcing Sharapova to hit a weak return that Serena made good on.

Serena's Oz story was that of the lioness who showed she had the courage and the heart to overcome all challenges in displaying some of her finest tennis against the greatest odds, despite not being anywhere near her physical peak. She showed us all that there's much more to tennis than hitting a ball. She showed us that when there's a deep hunger and a strong will to win, there are no boundaries to what the great athletes can achieve. Serena Williams confirmed that she is still the best athlete in the women's game, and she made a convincing argument for being the most skilled tennis player in the women's game. She made it clear why her presence is so desperately needed on the WTA tour. She roared, and we stood and took notice.

In her press conferences, both during and after the event, Serena made it clear she feels she can beat any woman on the tour if she's playing at even 50- to 60-percent of her ful potential. She also made it clear she had come to Melbourne to win, and that it wouldn't be a surprise were she to make a run to the final. On can only infer that she clearly thinks of herself as the best in the game; that, barring injuries and other distractions, hen she wants to win she wins. Period. Serena Williams possesses a little bit of Muhammad Ali in her pronouncements of greatness, yet she exhibits none of the verbal flair or eye-winking self-mockery that Ali was famous for and which took the edge off of his grand pronouncements.

AUTHOR'S NOTE: This material is copyrighted and may not be reprinted or reproduced without the express written or verbal consent of the author. Thank you for your cooperation.