On the eve of the Australian Open, the first leg of tennis' holy grail, the Grand Slam, it's difficult not to contemplate the possibility and importance of a 10th Grand Slam singles title for world no. 1, Roger Federer. One can already hear the sports writers clicking out their pronouncements of "greatest of all time." The GOAT list, seemingly the most treasured commodity among sports writers today, would suddenly show a shift in the hierarchy, or at the very least the insertion of an asterisk next to Pete Sampras' name: "*Most Grand Slam singles titles, for the moment."
Yes, a 10th Grand Slam title would bring Federer another step closer to surpassing Sampras' record of 14 Grand Slam victories and — it will be written as surely as the sun will rise another day — will set Federer apart from the rest by leaps and bounds. He's already amassed the single best three-year run in modern ("Open") tennis history, having lost merely 15 matches to date in that span and having amassed nine Grand Slam titles along the way. In three short years! No doubt, most now say, he's well within reach of Sampras' record, and a 10th Grand Slam title in Melbourne would simply close the book on that debate.
All this may be true, although I'm one to remain uncommitted until it happens, because all players are one torn ACL, one broken foot or fractured wrist, or one hip replacement away from leaving their careers too soon and too young. Remember Magnus Norman and Gustavo Kuerten. So I'll reserve final judgment on whether Federer is the greatest of all time. I will, however, say that in my estimation, he is one of the most well-rounded players, with as diverse and deadly an arsenal of offensive weapons and as solid a defensive game as anyone I've seen play the game. Furthermore, his transition game is right up there with the best, and his movement is second to none, though he is not the fastest player even of his own generation. What is certain, is that he has dominated his contemporaries as soundly and as surely as Sampras, Borg, Lendl and others had dominated theirs. But as for predicting the outcome of head-to-head battles, while it's an interesting exercise in what-if's and why-for's, I'm not certain it really amounts to much.
The question that I think really is worth asking, is "Which players have had the greatest impact on the game?" And here, I think, one might try to rank them and to present reasons for one's choices. I've given this question some serious thought, and I'd like to pose it to you. So, I won't give you my list (let's call it the GIOG list) quite yet, although I can tell you that the great Roger Federer is not at the top of this heap.
I'll post my list by the end of next week.
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.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
GIOG, interesting so I'll bite.
But first let me say that the responses you get will probably reflect the era in tennis terms from which the writer reflects.
As for me, on the women's side:
Monica Seles, Steffi Graf, Martina Navitrovola, Chris evert, both Williams sisters and finally Martina Hingis.
As for the men, Rod Laver, Jimmy Connors, John McEnroe, Borg, Lendl, Agassi, Sampras.
Its too early to tell about Federer either way for me. No explaination as to the whys right now, no time; but, later...(if I can remember who I listed). TWR
Interesting list, TWR. Now I'm curious to here the how's and why's behind each. How did they impact the way the game is played? Inopther words, what new technique or approach to the game did they either innovate or perfect that was adopted by others in their time and after, and which we can see traces of today? We should be able to look at the top players and their styles today and be able to say, for example, "See, that there can be found in its earliest form in Stffi Graf." Have at it. I'll be eagerly awaiting your ideas.
Post a Comment