Jolly Roger

As Andy Roddick stepped up to the baseline to serve at 14-15 in the fifth set of yesterday’s epic Wimbledon final against Roger Federer, he must have felt both confident and infuriated. Confident, because he had held serve 37 times in a row over the previous four hours, but infuriated as well because he’d not been broken the entire match and yet still found himself serving for his life. As it turned out, service game #38 was Roddick’s waterloo, and he was an unfortunate loser to the new world number 1.

It wouldn’t be accurate to say that Roger was lucky to win- he served brilliantly- uncorking over 50 aces and came up with the goods when he needed to, but for much of the afternoon, Roddick seemed to be the better player. The difference in the match was mental toughness- Andy showed pluck and determination and did NOT choke, but he simply lacked the killer instinct he needed in the second set tiebreaker, where he was up 6-2, before squandering four match points and losing 8-6. Roddick deserves credit for not folding after that heartbreaker, but he simply could not come up with the big shots to break Roger in the 5th set, and he ultimately lost serve at 14-15 down more because of his own unforced errors than Federer’s genius. And of course, Roddick will see that floating volley he flubbed on set point in the 2nd set tiebreaker at 6-4 in his nightmares for a very long time.

Few would have predicted Roddick to even make it to the finals, but Andy Murray came up short in the semis- spending too much energy berating himself and ultimately failing to make a dent in Roddick’s formidable serve. On the other side of the draw, Djokovic put in a similarly uninspiring display, ambling around the court looking as though he didn’t care if he won or lost. Moving forward into the hardcourt season, it will be interesting to see if Roddick can challenge the top 5 on a consistent basis.

Federer’s performance spoke for itself. After failing to convert on four break points in the 1st set, he re-grouped and played two brilliant tiebreakers, before outlasting Andy in the 5th. I have to admit, that after Fed dropped the 4th set, I wondered which Roger would turn up in the 5th- the resurgent one brimming with confidence after big wins on clay, or the uninspired one that seemed to lose confidence in himself following the loss to Nadal in the Aussie Open finals. In truth, this wasn’t Rogers finest match- he has returned Roddick’s serve better on other occasions, and at times he looked a bit lost, wrapping groundstrokes off the frame of his racquet. But he served brilliantly, elevated his game in the tie-breaks and held his game together long enough to win.

Now all of the inevitable tennis talk comes back to the, is he the greatest ever discussion, which I think is completely pointless. I love Federer and I am so thankful for what he has done for men’s tennis, but the idea that he is the best of all time because he’s won the most grand slams isn’t the slam dunk argument that many think it is. Comparing players from one generation to players from another is a waste of time. Prior to the 1990’s very few of the top players even entered all 4 grand slams in a calendar year, and before the dawn of “open tennis” pros were banned from the slams. So we have no idea how many grand slams Big Bill Tilden or Bjorn Borg could have won, had they played down under every year, or if Rod Laver had been able to compete each year after turning pro.

In my opinion, you can only be judged against your peers that are currently playing the game. On that score, Roger’s record is more one of consistency rather than dominance. The #2 and #3 players in the world- Nadal and Murray, both own decisive winning records against Federer (13-7 and 6-2) but could either of these players ever hope to match Fed’s record of reaching the semis in 21 straight grand slams? Not a chance in my opinion. The remarkable thing about Federer is the incredible consistency in majors- how does he stay healthy and motivated? How does he avoid the early round letdown against lower ranked players? What’s more impressive winning 15 majors, or making it to at least the semis in 21 straight? An argument could be made either way.

Those who claim that Fed cannot be anointed greatest ever because he has a losing record against Nadal are also off the mark. Roger is still a great player, but in truth, he is a few years past his prime. Half of the Nadal-Federer confrontations during Rogers prime (2004-7) came on clay- Rafa’s best surface, and the fact that Rafa won six of those is impressive but doesn’t mean he’s a better player than Roger, just a better clay court player. Two of their matches came on grass- Roger’s favorite surface, and he won both of those, and the remaining five hardcourt matches went 3 for Fed and 2 for Rafa.

So I think that all we can really conclude from the Rafa/Roger rivalry is that when both men were in their prime, Rafa was clearly better on clay, and Roger was a bit better on hard and grass courts. I don’t think that Rafa’s clay court dominance in any way diminishes Fed’s case for greatest of all time. That said, I think it makes more sense to simply state that Roger is among the greats of all time, right at or near the very top. Here’s hoping he continues to play for several more years to build his case even stronger.

Death to NBC

I'm already on record as a critic of NBC's coverage of Wimbledon but today really takes the cake. Two QF matches both began at 7AM CST, this AM, Federer/Karkovic, and Djokovic/Haas. NBC wants to broadcast the Fed match on tape delay, when its coverage begins at 10AM (in every time zone!). Ok, fine, I can live with that, i'm not happy about it- because I know they won't show the whole match, but I can live with it. So I assumed I'd get to watch Djokovic/Haas on ESPN. Not so fast. ESPN only showed about half the first two sets- cutting away for- who else, the Williams sisters, and their doubles match, and then another mens doubles match.

Then at 9AM CST, ESPN shuts down coverage entirely due to "contractual obligations with NBC." So now with Tommy Haas up two sets to love, i'm left hanging, and there is no coverage at all- not even on espn 360 for another hour. But at 10, NBC will no doubt show the Fed match on tape delay, meaning I don't get to watch the conclusion of this really great match. I really don't get it, is NBC just trying to piss tennis fans off? This is a joke!

NBC's Inexplicable Tennis Coverage

I knew today's NBC coverage would be a Williams sister-fest, but with Venus only on court for about a half hour before Anna Ivanovic retired with a knee injury, NBC scrambled and made a hash of its programming. First they showed the last 15 minutes of Federer/Soderling, which had already been broadcast on ESPN, then Venus/Anna on tape delay. When Anna hurt her knee, they covered the entire injury timeout without interruption. Now I like watching Anna get a massage as much as anyone, but why would you cut short match coverage to show an injury timeout?

But wait, it gets more bizzare. After showing Serena's quick thrashing of Hantchukova- which had also already been broadcast on ESPN- NBC then began to show us, get this, a lengthy RAIN DELAY on TAPE DELAY! So while there WAS live tennis going on, NBC showed us TAPED COVERAGE of the delay- including full coverage of Wimbledon's new roof opening and closing. Then they showed us play between Safina and Mauresmo when it finallyl resumed, and even showed us- on tape delay- their warmup! This rather than LIVE coverage of close matches involving Hewitt and Karlovic. Meanwhile, over on ESPN they were ahead in the Safina/Mauresmo match, so anyone flipping around would have already seen what NBC was showing.

Now I can understand the logic of showing us tennis on tape delay, but showing us rain delays, injury timeouts, warmups, and previously broadcast matches on tape delay? Give me a freaking break NBC. Please leave tennis coverage to someone else.

Fed Good Enough Against Giant Killer Soderling

Roger Federer's straight set win over Robin Soderling this morning was anything but routine, but Fed came up with the key shots when he needed to, and Soderling gave away way too many free points with sloppy unforced errors. Both players served brilliantly, and with the heat wave that's gripped London, the courts are playing fast and the rallies are short. This could be a massive advantage for Ivo Karlovic, the Croatian giant, who may face Federer next.

Where the Hell is Rafa? (When you need him?)

When I heard that Nadal had pulled out of Wimbledon my first reaction was that it would make life easier on Roger Federer, but when you look at the draw, the real beneficiary is Andy Murray. His half of the draw is filled with a slew of decent but ordinary players like Leyton Hewitt, Radek Stepanek, Tomas Berdych, Stan Wawrinka, Juan Carlos Ferrero, and Giles Simon. The only legit threat to Murray making the final seems to be Roddick- but, in truth, I don’t fancy Andy’s chances. Federer, on the other hand, has Djokovic, Soderling, Karlovic, and Tommy Haas lurking on his end of the draw.

Media reports have indicated that Rafa’s parents have separated, and that the trauma of their split has taken a toll on his game. It’s impossible to know how bad Rafa’s knees are, but I think that he’s the kind of player that would rather skip a tournament then play at less than 100% and possibly lose early. Too bad for us, because the 2009 men’s field is really lacking without him in the top half of the draw.

Wimbledon Must Change

I’m normally not one to embrace change over tradition, but Wimbledon must change. During the first week of the Championships, those of us lucky enough to have Direct TV, have been able to watch matches going on simultaneously across several channels. So when the networks were showing Serena and Venus playing doubles, I could flip to another match. Starting today, with NBC’s coverage, that liberty is gone. Wimbledon tradition is for all 16 remaining players in both the men’s and women’s draws to play on Monday, with no play on the middle Sunday. Serena hits the courts at Noon GMT on Monday, Venus at 1pm GMT, with Federer and Soderling taking the court at the same time. Those of us that want to watch Fed or any number of other matches are going to lose out, because we know that the Williams sisters trump everyone else when it comes to NBC’s coverage priorities.

If you have any interest in the 17 year old American qualifier, Melanie Oudin, she’ll be playing out on Court 18 on Monday- good luck catching anything other than (perhaps) the match point. We are also unlikely to be able to see the Verdasco/Karlovic, Hewitt/Stepanek, Djokovic/Sela, or Haas/Andreev matches either. NBC’s coverage is designed for soccer moms, whom they assume have the tennis attention span of your average house fly. So tennis addicts like me that want to watch all the men’s 4th round matches are up shits creek. You can try espn360.com but do you really like watching tennis on a computer? I sure don’t. Memo to the All England Club: spread the big matches out so we can actually watch the damn things!

Printable Wimbledon Draw Updated

http://www.wimbledon.org/en_GB/scores/draws/ms/msdraw.pdf