A Match Made in Heaven

No I’m not talking about Federer and Nadal, this is a friendly match. The match I am referring to is Roger Federer and Tiger Woods, arguably the most dominant athletes in sport today. And what is more is that their respective sports is probably the most difficult of all, which is of course tennis and golf. Most sports fans are aware of the countless hours golfers spend on perfecting their swings. And when it comes to tennis the professionals don’t necessarily spend that amount of time on their swings but they have to be top physical condition to meet the tough demands of the pro tour.

The question naturally arises who is the best, Federer or Woods? This is a very complex question since we are dealing with different sports, and results can therefor not be compared directly. However, there is certain things that can be looked at. As in tennis golf has four majors a year which is the most important tournaments in both sports and a players success can be measured by how well they have fared in them. That is the one big similarity in the respective sports but there are many differences. For instance a golfers’ professional career is about twice as long as a tennis player’s.

Tennis players retire usually around their early thirties because of the physical strain tennis puts on their bodies, whereas golf is much more easy on the physique which means golfers can remain competitive at a high level into their fourties. Another big difference is that in golf you play mostly against yourself and the course, whereas in tennis you play against your opponent. This  makes tennis a much more competitive, in-your-face kind of thing. Also in tennis the ball is moving whereas in golf the ball is still before it is hit. Both disciplines have their challenges, it’s really tough to say which one is harder.

I can go on for a long time about the two respective sports but I’d like to get back to the relationship between Roger and Tiger. It really fascinates me because they are so similar and have so much in common. And besides that they are very good friends. It is truly a match made in heaven. Both of them is considered widely to be the best of all time in their respective disciplines. In my opinion that is definitely true. Both of them is trying to break the all time major records of Pete Sampras and Jack Nicklaus. Roger has only two more majors to go to break Sampras’ record of fourteen, while Tiger have six to go to break the record of  Nicklaus.

Roger have more then enough time to do it and so does Tiger. So far Tiger has won 65 tournaments and amassed $82,354,376, while Roger have won 57 titles and amassed $44,593,957. There is really very little to choose between them. Personally i feel it’s harder to win tournaments in golf since you are competing against a whole field of players and in golf i think there can go a lot more wrong with your game. Even the best in golf struggles with their swing and on any given day it only has to be slightly off for a player to ruin their chances at winning a tournament. I just feel golf is more unpredictable then tennis.

If a player hits only one ball out of bounce it could be enough to cost him a tournament, whereas in tennis there is always time to recover. Therefor i have immense respect for what Tiger is doing, to win tournament after tournament the way he does requires incredible consistency. Of course the way Roger has dominated tennis is also unheard of. I mean from 2004-2008 he hardly lost a match! Even Sampras could never dominate like that.  Plus Sampras had a real weakness on the clay surface, where Roger has remained the second best in the world on that surface after the best clay courter of all time.

Federer is just so complete. There is no cracks in his game. Before 2008 if Federer lost a match it would be kind of a shocker.  He simply didn’t lose much, which is incredible if you take into account how competitive the men’s game is. Roger might have lost some of his dominance over the last year, but he will certainly be a grand slam contender for some time to come. This is why i call this a match made in heaven. They are both so good that it’s really hard to choose between them. Tiger has a certain temperament for the big occasion. When he smells blood he is very much like a Tiger going after his prey, nothing much will stop him.

I have seen putts that he made in big tournaments at crucial stages that he has no right to sink. But he does it time after time. It’s not luck, there is something magical about the man. I truly believe he has some kind of  access to a higher power. The same can be said for Federer though, the things he can do with a tennis ball is astonishing. There was no one like him in tennis before, he has a certain quality that is unheard of. He seems to pull off shots that other players don’t even think of attempting and he does so on a regular basis as well, therfor it can’t be luck either. Roger has hardly been tested in the big tournaments because he is just so much better then the rest.

He usually goes through a major only maybe dropping a few sets, unless of course it’s against Nadal on clay. Then Roger seems like a different player, he actually seems human and sometimes even less then human. But that is different in a sense because golf is only played on one surface, and Nadal is the best clay courter of all time. The debate of who is the best can go on forever. But persoanally  i am fascinated even more by their relationship. They try to support each other at tournaments when they have time off from their busy schedules. They both must know the pressures of expectation ever so well, both are expected to be the greatest of all time in their sports and that is no small thing.

The Big Three Plus One

Now that the 2008 season is over it’s time for me to do a review on what happened in the tennis world.  Most of you who know tennis would know what the title of this post means. The big three is  Rafael Nadal,  Roger Federer and Novak Djokovic. The player who is knocking hard on the door to make it the ‘big four’ is Andy Murray. However my personal opinion is that he needs to win a grand slam title before he can can claim that honour. So let me review each of the four players in 2008 and maybe look at what we can expect from them in the future as well.

The best player of 2008 of course was Rafael Nadal, who had his best season to date. He started the year by reaching the final of Chennai and after that achieving his career best result at the Australian Open by reaching the semi-finals where he lost to Jo-Wilfred Tsonga, another up and coming player from whom you can expect a lot in 2009. So that was a sign of bigger things to come for Nadal.  In the US hard court season he made the final of both Masters Series events in Indian Wells and Miami, losing to Djokovic in Indian Wells and to Davydenko in Miami. This all before his favorite clay court season even started. He would go on to win every tournament of the clay court season he took part in except for  Rome where he lost  surprisingly easy to fellow countryman Juan Carlos Ferero. The titles he won included two Masters Series events and the French Open which he won for a fourth straight year, a feat only Bjorn Borg has achieved thus far. Going on to the grass court season Nadal immediately found his rhythm and ominously for Federer won the warm up tournament at Queens club.

As could be expected he made the final of  Wimbledon where he would meet Federer for a third straight year in an epic five set thriller. He went on to become the first man since Borg in 1978 to win the French and Wimbledon in succession. Full of confidence Nadal won the next tournament he played in Toronto which was again a Masters Series event. Not surprisingly Federer’s number one ranking was under serious threat and Nadal would go on to claim the number one spot in the following tournament where he reached the finals and lost to Djokovic. Federer on the other hand seemed to be really struggling and lost in the round of sixteen to Ivo Karlovic. Next up was the Beijing Olympics where Nadal won the gold medal, taking revenge on Djokovic in the semi-finals for the loss in the Cincinatti Masters Series. In the final grand slam of the year Nadal came up against a very confident Andy Murray in the semi-finals and lose in four sets, still surpassing his previous best result at the US Open by two rounds.

After the US Open Nadal would go on to have a  good indoor season but he withdrew against Davydenko in the quarters of Paris due to injury, which would also keep him out of the Masters Cup in Shanghai. So all in all it was a break through season for Nadal and he pretty much dominated the tennis world. It’s really hard to see Nadal having another season like 2008. I don’t think he can dominate the game like Roger does. He puts too much into his tennis, every match he plays he goes through a certain grind that inevitably will catch up with him. He doesn’t play with the ease and talent that Roger does. Therefor it is not surprising that he got injured at the end of the season, missing out on one of the most important tournaments. We will have to see what happens with Nadal in 2009. Given that he stays fit he will probably win the French again, it’s hard to see anyone beating him there. As for Wimbledon i would pick Roger to reclaim his title there.

I have already reviewed Roger’s season, for that you can see the post ‘Federer-2008 in review’. I expect good things from Roger in 2009. Maybe he won’t be as dominant as before but i think he will have a solid season, winning one or two more grand slams and reclaiming the number one spot.

Next up is Novak Djokovic who had the best start to the season by winning the his first grand slam at the Australian Open.  He would also reach the final in Dubai and win the Masters Series at Indian Wells.  He had a very solid clay court season and won the masters series event in Rome. On the grass he made the final of Queen’s but disappointingly lose in the second round of Wimbledon to a resurgent Marat Safin. For the remainder of the season he performed pretty solid but didn’t win a title again until the final showdown in Shangai, where he won another very important title. So probably Djokovic’s best season to date, seeing that he won two very big titles. In 2009 I expect Djokovic to have another big season and maybe win another grand slam. I am looking forward to see how he defends his Australian Open title and also if he can make a bigger impact at Wimbledon in 2009 and give Roger and Rafa a real run for their money.

Finally there is Andy Murray who is another player who had a break through season, announcing that he will be a real force to reckon with in the upcoming 2009 season. He won five titles in 2008 which included two Masters Series events in Cincinatti and Madrid. He also made the final of the US Open where he lost 6-2, 7-5, 6-2 to a destructive Federer. This had to be particularly sweet revenge for Federer since Murray actually have a 4-2 career record against Roger and the US was a real big stage, so that had to hurt. However Murray has had a very strong finish to the 2008 season and he will definitely come out firing in 2009. Pete Sampras has already picked him as a grand slam winner in 2009. We will have to see about that but he certainly has a chance. Who knows, he might become the first British man since Fred Perry in 1936 to win Wimbledon. That would really be something but i think you all know who i’m backing to win the biggest tournament in the world…

Federer vs. Sampras

For those who doesn’t know Roger is currently standing on thirteen grand slam titles, one grand slam title short of Pete Sampras all time record of fourteen titles. For a long time people have been debating whether Roger is better then Pete. And while it’s a relevant debate i don’t think it’s a very difficult one to settle.

Having said that Roger hasn’t equaled or passed Pete’s record yet, so this is probably a good time for me to write about the ‘rivalry’. The first thing to consider is the one career meeting that the two had at Wimbledon early in Roger’s career, probably the most important match in his career up until that point.

Federer stated after the match that it was important for him to beat Sampras in his own back yard, and he wasn’t going to falter. He won the epic encounter 7-5 in the fifth set. A truly significant victory given that Sampras had been sitting on the Wimbledon throne for the better part of a decade. And when the moment of truth came Roger was as solid as a rock, calmly steering a forehand return down the line to complete a historic win.

This loss marked the beginning of the end for Sampras and he would retire from tennis not long after. In my mind that was a very significant match in terms of the Sampras-Federer rivalry. It’s obvious that they are both geniuses in their own right, but it has always occurred to me that Roger has an edge over Pete. Hence the 7-5 in the fifth score. Had the score been 7-6 in the fifth set it would have been too close to make a call.

But the fact that Roger broke Sampras to win the match was significant to me, and probably overlooked by the untrained eye. This was just the start however, and ever since Roger has proven over and over to me that he is the better tennis player. As gifted as Sampras was Roger is even more gifted. Roger is more complete. Where Sampras hardly had a weakness in his game Roger has no weakness.

There simply isn’t any cracks in Roger’s game. Technically he has a more sound backhand then Sampras, and his returns is certainly better. There is also less margin for error in his game and when it comes to fitness I’d have to say Roger has the edge. Also Roger has better hands; when the two met in 2007 for three exhibition matches Pete remarked that Roger had a back-hand flick that he never possessed.

All of these factors makes Roger a much better player on clay then Pete ever was. If the best clay courter of all time in Rafael Nadal wasn’t around Roger would without a doubt won a at least one French Open title so far, if not the grand slam itself. Roger may never win a title in Paris but that takes nothing away from the fact that he is in another class then Pete on the clay surface.

Moreover Pete’s strengths was his serve, his forehand, his volleys and his mental abilities. In all these areas he was probably better then Roger, although it’s debatable whether he had a better forehand or mental abilities. Pete certainly had a lot of firepower. And he had a certain killer instinct that Roger does not possess. But then again Federer has a certain calm as he showed against Pete when he beat him in their only career meeting.

Personally i take a lot of satisfaction in the fact that Roger seems to be better then Pete. I used to be a big Agassi fan and it was frustrating and even boring how at times Pete could dominate the best returner of all time with his serve. Federer is of course in another class then Agassi, he has a certain quality as a player and a man that is almost unheard of. I’d have to say that not only does Roger have the edge over Pete as a player but also as a human being.

As a tennis personality he is more popular the Pete ever was, Pete was often labeled as boring and emotionless. Roger on the other hand does show a certain humanity out on court, whereas Pete was kind of stale and emotionless. Even Roger’s game is much more exciting for me to watch, you never quite know what to expect from Roger, whereas with Pete it was pretty much the serve and the forehand that was going to dominate.

Sampras even recently admitted that Roger will break his record and i don’t think there is any doubt that he will. The question is rather how many grand slams Roger will end up winning. I’d say he will at least equal Pete’s record next year, and after that he will only be 28, and who knows for how many years he can still win grand slams after that! It’s really hard to make a prediction here but Roger will almost certainly win at least two more slams then Pete, making sure that it can’t be viewed as luck.

Hopefully this post will put all doubts about who is better to rest and make people appreciate how good this man really is. And not only is he the greatest tennis player that ever lived, he is also a very special human being. I am really surprised when i hear people say Roger is boring or that he’s arrogant. Nothing could be further from the truth. People who say this either know nothing about tennis at all or they are jealous. And that is all there is to it.

Federer-2008 in Review

The 2008 season have come to an end and players are taking a much deserved break with family and friends or getting in shape for the 2009 season.  As for Federer he is still enjoying the sun and the sea, after which he will will start training at the training camp in Dubai.  So what better time to review the 2009 season.

Federer had his worst season in 5 years, for the first time since 2003 not winning more then one grand slam title.  Still he had the second best season on the tour behind Rafael Nadal.  He still made the final of three grand slams and one semi-final, which is outstanding by any ones standards, accept the great man himself.  The start 0f 2008 wasn’t the best, maybe an ominous sign of things to come for Roger.

The first sign of a loss of form for Federer came against Janko Tipsarevic in the Australian Open which was a closely contested five setter. Something seemed to be off,  Roger seemed less dominant then we’ve gotten so used to.  So it was no surprise when Federer lost in straight sets in the semi-finals against in form Novak Djocovic.  Watching that match i could tell Roger  was out of sorts, he seemed nervous and lacked confidence, something we are not used to seeing from him at all.

So that was definitely not a good sign for all Federer fans. Luckily for us he was to hit his stride again during the clay court season and was the old Federer again.  In the French Open he was crushed by Nadal,  but as far as I’m concerned that was a long time coming.  Federer hasn’t figured out how to beat Nadal on clay and doesn’t seem to be getting closer to solving the matter. He really seems like a different player against Nadal on clay, like a stubborn child who does not learn.

Still getting to the final of the French was not a bad sign for Federer, even though he was obliterated in the final. But when Nadal won on grass at  Queen’s Club in L0ndon in the run up to Wimbledon, the warning signs were once again showing for Federer. As expected Nadal and Federer met once again in the men’s final and treated the tennis world to one of the most spell-binding matches in history of tennis on the grandest of scales. Nadal triumphed 6-4, 6-4, 6-7(5), 6-7(8), 9-7 in an 4 hour 48 minute epic encounter, ending the five year reign of Federer.

Once again i was not particularly surprised by these turn of events since Nadal had been knocking on the door for a while and seemed to always be improving on the grass surface, which can’t be said for Roger when it comes to clay.  Overall Federer played a pretty good tournament, even though it must have been extremely disappointing for him to lose one of the greatest matches of all time in his own back yard, with everything that was on the line.

However his disappointment was somewhat offset by his triumph in the Olympic Games doubles event, in which he won the gold medal with Stanislas Wawrinka. Losing against James Blake in the sinlges must have been another great disappointment for Roger, but like any great champ he focused on the positive and therefor got more of it. He seemed like a different player going into the US Open. Even though he didn’t have the best of US hard court seasons he went into the Open with a sense of urgency, something that was clearly lacking at the start of the year. Did he become complacent? Did he start feeling the pressure from someone like Djokovic? Who knows, only Roger will know the answer to that, or maybe it was a combination of both.

Whatever the case may be the US Open of 2008 was going to be a pivotal tournament in the career of Roger Federer.  Should he not win it people would say Federer is burned out and it would have been hard for him to prove people wrong again. Should he win it everyone would say Federer is back and the whole slump of 2008 would be forgotten, and he could start anew in 2009. As a true champ would respond Federer won the Open, taking revenge on Djokovic along the way for the Australian Open loss and convincingly beating Andy Murray in the final 6-2, 7-5, 6-2.

At the Master’s Cup in Shanghai Roger wasn’t at his best, not making it past the group stages,  but he had back problems so his preparation wouldn’t have been ideal.  So all in all I’d have to say that 2008 was a good year for Federer, nothing more and nothing less. For anyone else it would have been an amazing season, but then again Federer isn’t anyone else. Only Nadal had a better season, and it’s hard to see Nadal ever having a season like that again. Like Sampras recently said,  he goes through a certain grind in his matches, while Federer has a much more economic, easy style.

The 2009 season promises to be as exciting as any, with Murray adding himself to the big three, making it the big four now. These four will fight it out for the grand slams in 2009, while Roger will be looking to at least equal Sampras grand slam record, and preferably pass it. It won’t be easy, but he will certainly come out firing in 2009. So don’t expect another slip up at the first grand slam of the year like in 2008. Roger is a man on a mission to be the greatest of all time, and he is going to take some stopping…

First Blog

This is my first blog and i will use it to introduce myself. My name is Ru-an Zietsmann and i used to be a tennis player myself. I tried to make it as a pro but it is harder then you think! 🙂 Anyhow i finished with tennis in 2007 and since then i’ve been working on the internet. I was doing a lot of affiliate marketing but kind of got tired of the whole sales thing and i have since found Squidoo where i can create my own lenses at no cost and with little effort. It is a lot of fun and i have made some lenses of Roger as well. If you want to check out Squidoo the link is on my blog, it’s really a nice community over there. Since i have started there i have enjoyed writing and so i’ve decided to start a blog on Federer. It’s also a good way to get traffic to my lenses.

The reason i’m starting a blog on Federer is because i like tennis of course but i also basically worship Federer. I like him as a player and as a person, so i respect him in all areas. He is a rare individual, both a great champion and a very popular human being. In my mind he is already the greatest tennis player of all time and it’s just a question of time before he breaks Sampras slam record. Whether he wins the French Open or not is not that relevant in my mind since the greatest clay courter of all time in Rafael Nadal is around. In this blog i will closely follow the remainder of Federer’s career and on as well as off the court. I hope this will become a very popular blog amongst not only Federer fans but tennis fans in general, as i love the whole game not just Federer and will keep track of it in my blog.