Opinion - Editorials   

Defining a champion's greatness

As a sporting odyssey, Roger Federer's much-celebrated journey towards the peaks inhabited by the likes of Bill Tilden, Rod Laver, Bjorn Borg, and Pete Sampras is rather unique. Unlike a play that is performed to a written script, sport unfolds with utter unpredictability — and that is part of its timeless appeal. In the event, it is incontestable evidence of the Swiss maestro's greatness that he has, with a brand of wizardry that galvanises the spirit, turned the unknown into the known. Come Wimbledon, the big question is no longer who's going to win the men's title. Instead, the debate centres on who Federer will meet in the final and how many sets he would concede on his sublime waltz to yet another title. Then again, this sort of predictability extends way beyond the famous grounds of the All England Lawn Tennis Club where Federer made light of the charismatic Spaniard Rafael Nadal's challenge to win his fourth straight title on Sunday to join Bjorn Borg and Pete Sampras, as the only players to have won four in a row in the Open Era (post-1968). From former greats to commentators, critics, and fellow competitors, everybody seems to agree on one thing. The man who conjures with his creative racquet what Leonardo da Vinci accomplished with a paintbrush — invaluable art and timeless beauty — is the most naturally talented player of all time.

That Federer will someday scale an unconquered peak and establish himself in the record books as the greatest player of all time is something that is beyond the realm of doubt in most people's minds. But, then, in sport, greatness is not absolute; nor is it merely about numbers — major titles won, number of weeks spent as No.1. The finest yardstick of greatness in an individual sport is to be found in the cauldron of competition. How good was Laver in comparison with Ken Rosewall or Roy Emerson or Tony Roche? How dominant was Sampras in an era that he shared with a string of great players, not the least Andre Agassi, one of only five men in history to have won all the four major titles? It is a reflection of Sampras' genius that he not only compiled a 20-14 career head-to-head record against Agassi but also beat the man from Las Vegas in four out of the five Grand Slam finals that they contested. Many of Federer's chief rivals, in recent times, men such as Roddick, Lleyton Hewitt, and Marat Safin, have surely lacked the stature of the giants that Laver and Sampras had to go up against. The nature of the opposition is of course hardly Federer's fault but he overcomes them all with a breathtaking game replete with grace and beauty. Yet, the mercurial rise of Nadal may not have come a season too soon. In his first Wimbledon final, the 20-year old from Mallorca took the fight to the Federer camp, even if the challenge was brief and much less than substantial. It is his rivalry with Federer that is going to ultimately define the Swiss world champion's greatness and determine his place in the pantheon.

Printer friendly page  
Send this article to Friends by E-Mail

Stories in this Section

Facing up to the GSLV failure
Defining a champion's greatness
Domestic imperatives in Iran's foreign policy
A tragedy foretold
Too many planes, too few pilots
Corrections and Clarifications
Doubts over Mexico election
Nuclear power is safer now, but we still don't need it
Don't lose heart!
Agni-III fiasco
`No' to vandalism
What a way to go!

Copyright © 2006, The Hindu. Republication or redissemination of the contents of this screen are expressly prohibited without the written consent of The Hindu