Sampras to Stakhovsky: The flipside of Roger Federer (Part 3)

This is the final part of a three-part series on Roger Federer titled ‘The flip-side of Roger Federer’.

Federer and Nadal’s is one of the more enduring rivalries (Getty Images)

But, every man has a demon.

Rafael Nadal had one too. No, in fact two.

Nadal’s old demons started haunting him. For long, his shoulder and knees were never quite okay. But during all these days it didn’t really trouble him. But the high amount of topspin on his serve and his straight arm forehand started troubling his shoulders. Nadal was unabashed, he continued playing with full vigour. However, he lost the US Open semifinal to Andy Murray. Federer had eased his way into the final. Andy Murray, who then had a better head-to-head record against Federer, could not prevent him from claiming his 5th US Open. Still, this was seen only as a consolation for the Wimbledon loss.

Nadal however, returned strong in the Australian Open. He defeated Federer in five sets in the final that left Federer in tears in the post-match speech. One thing was visible, age was catching up on Federer.

2009 would go on to be an important year for Federer and a forgettable one for Nadal. After he had won his first Australian Open, everyone expected him to comfortably streak to a 5th Roland Garros title. However, the law of averages stated that Nadal would lose and he did to everyone’s surprise. Robin Soderling, who had been raising a few eyebrows with his performances previously, defeated the Spaniard in the 4th round. That was the first time Nadal had lost on the red clay of Roland Garros.

This was an opportunity even the great Pete Sampras had been denied.

Federer was destined to complete a career Grand Slam. Even the Gods were on his side. Nadal had lost. In the fourth round, Federer had won from two sets down and a breakpoint which if converted would have had Tommy Haas serving for the match. He played five sets against Juan Martin Del Potro in the semifinal and went through. He faced Soderling in the final, who had squeezed his way past the top seeds. There wasn’t any doubt about the result. That was Federer’s tournament. Even an earthquake couldn’t have stopped him. Robin Soderling was no match for Federer’s brilliance in the final and finally, the Swiss maestro had overcome the milestone that had so convincingly eluded two of the greatest grass-courters of the Open era.

He had won 14 Grand Slam titles and equalled Sampras’ record.

It was destined that the 15th one would be at the place where it all started. Nadal’s recurring knee injury ruled him out of Wimbledon. Nadal’s injury meant a clear passage for Federer. Federer was the favourite and it was only a matter of time before Federer lifted the trophy for the sixth time. Federer never had to sweat till the final, where he played a five-setter against Andy Roddick and clinched the title.

Statistically, he was the greatest player of all-time.

The US Open was where Federer’s potential downfall started. Nadal returned and everyone was anticipating a Federer-Nadal final. But, there came a new champion from South America. Juan Martin Del Potro clinched the title beating Nadal in the semifinal and Federer in an epic five-setter in the final.

This match portrayed Federer’s weakness against young and physically fitter players. Next was the 2010 Australian Open. Again, to Federer’s advantage, Nadal retired in the quarter-final against Murray, who eventually reached the final. Federer easily outplayed Murray, who was yet to get to the peak of his career. This was the only title for the next two years as Federer didn’t even come close to winning a Grand Slam.

Nadal on the other hand, was in full form, and won Roland Garros and the US Open, thus completing a career Grand Slam

This proved outright that Federer could win a Grand Slam only when Nadal was out of contention. This theory was strengthened further when Federer won the 2012 Wimbledon title after Nadal was beaten in a five-setter by Lukas Rosol, owing to his problems with recurring tendnitis in the knee.

Federer won against an emotional Murray in the final and took his 17th Grand Slam title.

Sergiy Stakhovsky dumped Federer out of this year’s Wimbledon (Getty Images)

Since then, Federer has never reached the semifinal of a Grand Slam. Federer was dumped out of this year’s Wimbledon by Sergiy Stakhovsky, just like he had done to Sampras all those years ago, as he lost in four sets in the second round. He put on an extraordinary display of serve and volley tennis to which Federer could not respond. He was so quick, Federer couldn’t match his pace and transition from the baseline to the net.

A look at Federer’s statistical career will tell us that he was the greatest player of all time. But, a closer look at his comparison with Nadal would say he was never better than Rafael Nadal.

Some may argue that Nadal himself said,” If somebody says I am better than Roger, I think that person don’t know nothing about tennis”. This was said by Nadal out of sheer respect for the man. Federer himself would agree that Nadal at his peak would have easily beaten Federer at his peak.

As he rightly said, “He’s a fantastic player and he’s going to be around so much longer so I’m happy with every one I get before he takes them all”.

Federer neither had the power to hit forehands like Djokovic, nor did he have the ability to run all day like Nadal. His shots were precise and had elegance in them. But elegance is nought against hard-workers and determined players like Nadal, who give their best every point.

Rafael Nadal has one of the best forehands of today’s game with an enormous amount of topspin and power combined with pace and bounce, while Federer’s is an elegant, yet not-so-effective forehand. When not in form, he keeps hitting his forehands wayward and they are a liability.

Serving is an art. Federer was a master of this art, but Nadal devoloped himself into one. Federer was one of the best servers on tour. On his day, he serves extraordinarily, but on most days he serves averagely. Rafael Nadal on the other hand didn’t have a potent serve, but improved it so well that it is one of the most venomous serves in the game.

Coming to the physical part of the game, Federer would not even be near Nadal. Nadal is an extremely fit player possessing one of the best physiques in the world of sport. Nadal would have given body-builders a run for their money. Federer on the other hand was just good enough to equal the fitness of any top 20 player. Nadal can slug it out all day whereas Federer is just not good enough to keep running the whole match.

The mental strength is what matters most in long matches. While both of them are equally good at it, Nadal plays the same way throughout the whole match, he has the burning desire to win which can be seen on his ferocious face. Federer plays every set in a different way and doesn’t have the burning desire in him like Nadal does.

To tweak chef Marco Pierre White’s words,” Hard work beats the talent, when talent doesn’t beat hard work.”

Federer was every player’s nightmare. But Nadal was the man who was Federer’s greatest nightmare. Federer outclassed most of his opponents, but that was insignificant against Nadal. Nadal would simply overpower Federer and outlast Federer.

Overall, Federer is a magician who wields his wand, the racquet to accomplish the things, while Nadal is an acrobat who lets his body do the work. As it was proved, magic works only against the feeble-minded while physical effort can outlive the greats.

It is a saddening fact indeed that Nadal shall always be remembered as “The man who dominated Roger Federer” rather than “The greatest player of the Open era.”

To all those who may think I am a Federer-hater, I too am a Federer fan who wept when Stakhovsky put him out of Wimbledon.

Deluded people keep dwelling in their dreams; come back to reality and realise the truth rather than jumping with the masses.

Many fail to realise the importance of time and still believe Federer has what it takes to win more titles.

In what was a story of David and Goliath, many were deceived into believing Nadal was the Goliath. It was always Federer who was the Goliath.

Winning one more Grand Slam may be an over-achievement for Federer at this stage of his career.