Article

  • The times, they are a changin'... (Part 1)

    3/25/08 12:26 AM | Jonathan Morgan
    - Used to be in men's tennis, you could count on two things for sure. Number one was that Nadal would win everything on clay and Federer would sweep up anywhere else, leaving the rest of the tour to scrap on whatever poor event neither player showed up for. Not any longer.

    While Nadal's clay dominance is still in effect, Federer has slowed. The rise of the Novak has shaken up the sport.

    Consider this. Roger Federer's absolute peak was from the Masters Cup in 2003 to Dubai in 2007. Sure, he won a slam before that and has won some since. But the aforementioned stretch of time was when the man was untouchable. A Federer loss in those days was a sign of the apocalypse. In that time period, he won 264 matches to just 15 losses, winning 37 titles. You can pull win streaks and finals streaks from that time period until your hair falls out. The guy had over 8000 ranking points for some time and at one point was 3900 points ahead of Nadal for #1!!!

    Oh, how things have changed. 2 losses to Canas, the usual clay losses to Nadal, that thing in Rome with Volandri, Djokovic in Montreal, Nalbandian back to back in the fall, Gonzalez in a crazy display at the Masters Cup, Djokovic again in Australia, Murray in Dubai, and now Fish in Indian Wells. Thats 12 losses in a year. Peak Federer lost 12 matches in 3 years.

    Not to say that this is a bad thing. During Federer's reign, many questioned the validity of his acheivements, citing a weak field, lack of courage in opponents, and a willingness of the field to really not even try. To play for second place as it were. Each time an event would come up, Federer was the victor before a point was even played.

    Then along came this young Spanish fireball with muscles that he seemed to have posessed since the womb. He had no fear. He played the big man on campus, and he beat him down 4 years ago at this event in Miami. At the time, people thought this Nadal kid had game, but to beat the World #1 Roger Federer as a little 17 year old? Blasphemy! It was a fluke, a luck win for sure. Roger himself, however, seemed to speak prophetically, saying after that loss, way back in 2004, before Nadal is who Nadal is now, that Rafael would be the next #1.

Tell a friend »

Comments


Write comment

You have to be logged in to comment. If you do not have an account, click here to register. It only takes a minute and you'll be redirected back to this page.
Username:

Password: