Mike! Your theory don't stand! In tennis, it is about compatbility. Well, in tennis is depends on the type of games that you play against the type of games that others are playing and your draws! Nowadays, even Haas and Roddick could give Federer real threats in the Grand Slam events. So the younger players with the games could put away Federer undoubtfully.

Speaking of compatibility. Not to mention, Federer is also having problems with Nalbandian and Canas.

Gordon, your frentic rebuttals are devoid of any semblance of coherent thought, all I can do is laugh and shake my head at your inane conjectures. I hope people like you can one day come to terms with the now almost nigh universal sentiment of Federer as the Greatest player of all time and appreciate his stature and what he has brought to the sport. Take care and be well. :)

coming in late. mr. tignor, you do not disappoint. you've been amassing a rich trove of spot-on articles that we have been savoring with utmost relish. thank you so much. much appreciated.

I'm late reading your post, Steve, but want to thank you for your thorough and thoughtful insight on why Federer is so great. He does take everything players give him. After I read that I've thought of Sunday's match, with your analysis in mind. It fits well, like the last piece in a puzzle.

Gordon, the toughest player Fed has ever played ... in regards to match ups, game wise ... is Rafa Nadal. The same Rafa that he beat in straight sets, on Rafa's favorite surface, in Rafa's home country. There couldn't have been a more adverse situation for him to have to rise above.

One reason for his success may have been Fed's decision to break routines that he tied into the negative results he had experienced playing Rafa in the past.

If that is true, it's quite possible that Fed's attitude towards players he may have felt threatened by in addition to Rafa (EX. Murray & Nole) may have changed enough for him to turn the tables on them. The success at the FO and Wimby should have only strengthened his belief.

The actual answer is ... we don't know, making my opinion as much of a reach as yours.

Great article:

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2009/writers/joe_posnanski/07/07/andy.roddick/1.html

Joe Montagnino & co--it takes a special special gift to make something decisively difficult look easy. Sampras did not have it any harder than Federer--there level of talent is just incomparable.

Surely, you can't also argue that Sampras didn't succeed on clay because his opposition was just too difficult. No, he didn't succeed ON CLAY because his game style was not adaptable to clay. He won on fast courts, more often than not, because of his fantastic serve, 1st & 2nd & big forehand. Some of the players who dominated Sampras cannot hold court with Federer & THAT'S BECAUSE HE HAS THE VERSATILITY THAT Sampras NEVER HAD.

He is just THAT good.

VT, I said Rafa the person, not some 2-bit idiot(Soderling) that had never beaten him,think knees please. I am sure Uncle Toni and Rafa will review the tapes from that match and be prepared for thier next encounter. I spoke of Roger what has Soderling got to do with it. The only thing I can say about Soderling that he is big, dumb and ugly. One of us can't read Isaid quote" Rafa was a knunklehead for over playing for him to hurt his knees", I did not call Roger that. To the person that thinks I am stupid I have a college degree do you ? You were not even Man /Woman enough too post your name, Shame on you. Is it a crime to like someone other than Roger, or if you like Rafa you are a Troll. Get real,Lois Lame (I like that,very funny). Everyone who are writing dirty letters, get real. Everyone has an opinion which I try to respect, I never insult,call names or say anything that I feel is hurtful to anyone blogging on this site but "don't start no trouble and there won't be any".

Well said, Kennedy Myles. I wish I had read your post before I responded.

gordon: your comments are senseless. Federer has lost to a number of younger and/or lesser opponents in various secondary tournaments. Typically, these are 3 set tournaments, So what? He performs in the Grand Slams like no one else, that is why his record of 20 or 21 straight semifinal appearances in the Slams is so amazing. He consistently puts himself in a position to win. Nadal, who I love as a player and competitor, has yet to reach that level of consistency in all Grand Slams. He still has a way to go on hard surfaces, including the US Open.

I agree with Lois. Insulting each other and other players is unworthy of all of us. That's what a forum is about -- a place where people can express their opinions. The only rule should be that we do it respectfully, without foul language and rudeness. Funny how Fed and Rafa fans can be so hateful when these players like and respect each other so much. We could learn from them! I also agree with the poster who reminded us that Federer was ill through most of 2008, and at the end of the year he was suffering from back problems that affected his serve. He worked with Higueras to make some modifications that really affected his serve for awhile. One could argue that Fed's being only a few weeks out of the hospital with mono created some major "luck" for Djokovic during the 2008 AO. Fed was turning from white to red during his semi with Djoker and was having trouble moving toward the end. People won't remember that, however. They'll remember that NJ won the tournament. That's sports. Luck today, not so much tomorrow.

Interesting questions, Mike at 07/07/2009 8:51AM; interesting questions indeed. I believe that the pressure is now off. He has been chasing Pete for so long & in the past couple of years the pressure had intensified because he had gotten so close--plus, he hadn't won the French. Now that both monkeys are off his back, the old dazzling-shot-hitting Fed might be just around the corner. At least that is what I believe.

Also, he has also learned to "win ugly"--at least as ugly as someone like Federer can ever play. I sometimes got the impression that his artistic qualities would not allow him to "stoop" to the level of playing certain shots even if it ultimately cost him the match. Now that he has figured out that he doesn't always have to play pretty--some more versatility has entered the fray. I think that will be especially helpful when playing Nadal & even, Murray, in the future.

We shall see. So much intrigue still to come.

Lois--I wonder if Soderling would still be a "2-bit idiot" after he beats Rafa a second time. I think it is disingeniuos to call someone who did something his contemporaries had been unable to do in four prior years a 2-bit idiot.

Soderling played Rafa & beat him. Rafa was healthy enough to get-up, get suited & get himself to court PC. A few hours later he was beaten--he was still on both legs by the way. Soderling accomplished something that day; you may not like the end result but he did it. He beat Rafa--end of story.

Please also remember that Rafa was still winning matches with those same knees--that is, before he lost to Soderling. So, NO, Soderling is a whole lot more than a "two-bit" player. He is a guy who has one of the styles that Rafa will likely always struggle against. If Rafa wanted to used his knees as an excuse for Soderling entering the next round then he should have just withdrawn.

Beating Rafa does not make him better or a more accomplished clay-courter than Rafa; but on that day: SODERLING WAS THE BETTER PLAYER. No one can ever take that away from him.

roddick es una persona maravillosa y ademas es el idolo de mi hijo queriamos contarle que hay mucha gente que lo quiere solo para que siga y sea feliz, es una gran persona.

And don't forget that Soderling's demolition of Davydenko was extraordinary - cleaner and more conclusive, I'd say, than Berdych's at Wimbie (once or twice, you had the feeling Davydenko was coming back against Berdych). And Soderling's fight back in the 5th against Gonzalez was testament to his new found maturity. I look forward to seeing Soderling at the US Open - he definitely has the potential to cause a lot of trouble. Probably not to win. I wonder why not. I mean, I could see him beating del Potro for example, and I could see del Potro winning the tournament. But somehow, not Soderling. Pity. An unfairly maligned character.

Lois, I apologize for taking a stab at you, personally ... that was out of line.

At the time, reading a post that identified not only a Professional tennis player ... but a very good one that has accomplished great things as of late, as a "2-bit idiot" ... had me assuming the author was simply a troll. Didn't think a regular poster would sink that low ... my mistake.

So true--grendel. Soderling's defeat of Rafa was no fluke. If it had been he would have beaten other good clay-courters & made it all the way to the finals. Heck, he continued his fine play right into Wimbledon where he lost a very tight 3-setter to Roger.

No matter what anyone might think of his personality he is extremely talented & has the game that could blow anyone off the court.I wouldn't want to see him in the quarter of any of my faves at the US Open. If he has the belief, he could certainly win the US Open--though, like you, I don't see it quite at the moment.

run at the French was no

I've read that some folks said Roger should have just told Nike "no" to the clothes and all. Well, maybe I'm different from the average person because I LOVE what Nike is doing with tennis fashion, particularly with Roger. I love the fact that he has his own "RF" line of clothing. (I even have my own RF cap). It is a fantastic marketing tool for tennis. When I wear my RF cap out, some folks actually recognize it and say "Oh, you like Federer"? Who would have thought that would have happened in the past?

Like in golf with Tiger Woods and his TW stuff, Roger's "RF" lines are getting noticed and people are buying them. It's good when I can wear the hat and people recognize it vs all these other people who have jerseys of their favorite football, basketball, or baseball players. Why shouldn't tennis get into the marketing business too? Nike just came out with a 15 t-shirt for Roger and I will be buying it too! I'm proud to wear the clothing my 'sport idols' wear.

I applaude Nike for getting tennis into the fashion era and I applaud Roger for being right there with them. I can't wait to see what they come up with next! And Roger looks GOOD to me in his outfits. I'm glad all the players don't look like "Roddick" (as someone said earlier) because his clothes doesn't fit. Roger looks great. But again, that's my opinion.

And for those who are saying Roger's French Open doesn't count because he didn't go through Rafa? Well, if you look at the last 6 grand slam finals...the only CONSTANT is that Roger had been in the final. That's something HE has control over. He can't control who is on the other side of the net. It's not his fault Nadal didn't make the final at Paris. It's like when Nadal beat Puerta at the French Open...You can't control your opponent. YOU just have to get there yourself. Roger has done that consistently.

Besides, the eventual champion beats the field to become the champion. If you didn't beat someone directly you beat someone who was playing well enough to beat that someone. Tennis, like driving, only requires you to take care of your own side.

This Roger didn't beat Nadal at RG nonesense is akin to those who argue that he reigned over a weaker era than Sampra. Both are distinctly unfair & quite bogus.

It's amazing how many RF haters come out of the woodwork when he wins yet another GS. It's like none of his accomplishments count unless he beats Nadal in a final. Maybe we should take away a few GS from Pistol Pete, afterall beating Pioline (twice) and Martin hardly counts as winning a GS, right?

As for the H2H record debate, which is pretty much the last gasp Fed detractors have left, maybe if Nadal more consistently reached the finals of GS not played on clay, Roger would have a better record against him. Instead, we punish Roger for reaching every final and losing some to Nadal.

Fot: when you expressed surprise that some Fed fans were sad Roddick lost, would even like him to have won, I understood where you were coming from. I come from that country too. Nevertheless, there are some limits. As an analogy, one can be a patriot but decline to go along with the slogan:"my country right or wrong". Probably, as a patriot, one would not be precisely evenhanded - that would be to be robotic rather than humane. Even so, if one's country - and let us assume one loves one's country, not a given -if it does something clearly vicious, one dissents. Furthermore, one can dissent in the name of one's country; that is to say, one can feel that the honour of the country one loves has been besmirched.

All this is a bit heavy, but what I'm trying to get at is that Federer is giving ammunition to his enemies by donning this peculiar apparel at Wimbledon. Quite reasonable people, people who have no axe to grind against Federer, think he looks ridiculous. I've always contested this idea that Federer is bigheaded, as you may have noticed, since it is Zola in particular I have had battles with. I have felt she misinterprets many of his comments, takes them out of context and so on. But on this front, I can't do it. I just don't see how you can deny that Federer is being swollenheaded with that suit, that bag, all those embossed initials. I feel Federer has quite a nice, sly sense of humour. But it's deserted him here. And furthermore, he is taking himself so seriously somewhat at the expense of the other players.

Considering the almost insane attention Federer receives - and I doubt if you can overestimate the mischief inherent in this sort of thing, extreme fame is good for nobody and the casualty list provides sombre reflection - I am amazed at Federer's general levelheadedness. His fundamental decency comes through again and again in the interviews. But I suppose something has to give, and it does so in the shape of these cartoon clothes. Your enthusiasm for all things Federer, Fot, comes across as entirely innocent, and you have the ability to disarm the harmful. But not everyone is as good as you, and certainly not Nike.

Thanks for this, Steve. I enjoyed the last weekend all the way to the final point, and it was a shame that it had to end on an error (actually two forehand errors from Roddick). But you've really captured the beauty of the sport and of our champions, and I love the final paragraph - Andy Roddick should make us all proud. Winning is great, but "treating those two impostors just the same" is the mark of a true champion.

Why doesn't tennis market tshirts with their players names on them? like other sports do?

I have friends who have been stopped at tourneys because of the tshirts they were wearing. (they made them up themselves)

er - sorry, bit OT there - the FoT's post made me think of it. :)

Tennis is a media event as well as a sport, and it's a good thing. It's those companies like Nike that make it possible for us to see tennis played in beautiful stadiums via an expensive broadcast. The clothing companies literally make it possible for many players to participate in the sport. I think the outfits worn by the players on and off the court are part of the fun. You can like them or not, but to diss someone because of them is not cool. As for Federer's "15" jacket, it was remarkably subtle and tasteful. Have you seen the championship T-shirts and hats football, baseball, basketball and soccer players put on as soon as they win a championship? Sure it's marketing, but it's also a way for the players and fans to celebrate. Federer was very subdued and un-arrogant after his Wimby victory. He was probably exhausted and was certainly feeling for Andy, so while people criticized him for his low-key response (there are always critics, aren't there?), he was trying NOT to showboat too much. He knew what it took to win and how Andy felt. So he didn't flaunt the 15 jacket. In fact, he didn't seem to know quite where the 15 was. And the "What type of jacket or sweater will Federer wear?" question has become part of the fun before Wimbledon. It's not just him, anyway. You didn't criticize Serena's trench coat. I think people are hard on Roger when it comes to his post-match interviews. First, remember that although he speaks English well, it is not his native language. It's also refreshing to hear someone being honest and not coming on with a phony self-derogatory face a la "I just try to do my best." He has such joy about him. When he says, "I played great," there's something almost child-like in it. He's not modest, but that's okay. He's a great champion and he knows it. What's wrong with that? At least he didn't go around wearing T-shirts that proclaimed him to be the "real" #1 when Rafa held that position. I love his genuineness. To those who keep blasting Fed's clothing and associating it with arrogance and lack of sportsmanship, when you have been voted Sportsman of the Year for year after year by your peers, other tennis professionals, the press and the fans, you will have room to talk.

Thanks for apologies and speaking on my behalf everyone. I guess I myself got a little carried away. I guess you can say my week just stank, with Rafa unable to play for his Wimbleton title and crying for micheal a hole week (along with his furneral) I just felt crappy. I apologize for any thing I may have said to offend some ones elses player or for spewing my ugleness around.
MY BAD,SORRY (I guess I can feel good about eating my cheries now LOL).

P.S. a special THANK YOU to Lynne Danley and Mike, I am now not only going to eat my cherries but I am going to get my own but kicked with my Wii Tennis game. That should shut my big mouth.LOL

So far Daveydinko 3 games and me none (on Wii).LOL Oh what a world ,what a world. Now I am mad with the Daveydinko Wii, I think I will take a sip of my Vitamen tea with my cherries and see if I can turn this thing around. Someone was right it depends on your DRAW and how well you can adjust to the player you are playing. Well here I go again I will not give up, there's going to be some but kicking on this machine.LOL

Great post Steve, I could not agree more.

I've read some great tennis writing over the years and agree this piece topped them all. Absolutely wonderful. Thanks.

At the same time I want to note that when people speak of comparing eras or who was or is the greatest player of all time, I also relished Bud Collins' comment to someone who was opining on the subject. What Bud said was "I guess you never saw Pancho Gonzalez play."

Steve,

The only ommission in your fine article was that Roddick was injuired from his fall...and so his game was diminished (just enough to lend to his defeat?)

The GOAT for Fedderer is probably right for now...what an impressive record. Who will be named so in five years if a healthy Nadal returns?

While the Fed-haters grunt, and continue to wish Roger the worst and write down 'clever' comments why Roger is just another average tennis player, he, to their displeasure, will keep collecting Grand-Slam trophies. All this, while there is always a new pretender and someone else "who deserved to win better". Roddick left his hip and his will trying to beat the Swiss Perfection. Nadal wore his knees off and a good deal of his love for the sport, but he, at least, got his place in tennis. They said the same about Cañas, and after that, Nalbandian, and Stepanek and ... who will be next?
Aren't there any videos of Fed-haters when they behold the Swiss maestro win the last point of a Slam?

OK Guys, lets all stop beating ourselves to death over all this. Let's go on to something new like all the other Tornaments coming
up. Now we can all argue about what players we think is going to win lets, all start right now. OK I'll be the brave-one and comment first.Germany-Rafa, Rogers Cup-Rafa are there anymore that we can have a friendly debate on. Play nice guys, let us try not to hurt each others feeling, call names, etc-let's all be grown-up about this. Even tho Tennis seems to bring out the worse in all of us-Get Ready, Get Set, GO (LOL0.

Federer is by far GOAT! Did Roddick play better? Possibly, but its because Federer was not at his best. Federer's B+ game beat Roddick A++ game. Why? Because Federer stepped it up when it mattered and his resolve after last year's loss to Nadal was so much stronger. Kudos to Roddick for making it that deep into the 5th set. But Roger won because he did not falter. It was not a display of brilliant shots like in the past, but a display of changing his game to match his opponents. He outaced Roddick and had 30+ more winners. So once again the question did Roddick play better? I don't think so, because Federer beat him to the finish line.