The end is far for Roger Federer

Like every other sport, tennis is a game of victories and defeats, of adulations and brickbats. Stringent comments and media scrutiny of the game are also a part of the professional career of a tennis player. Even the greats are not an exception of that rule, including the great Roger Federer.

Roger Federer’s Grand Slam record in 2013 reads like this – Australian Open semi-final – lost to Andy Murray, French Open quarter-final – lost to Joe Wilfred Tsonga, and Wimbledon second round – lost to Sergiy Stakhovsky. The second round exit from Wimbledon, uncharacteristic of Federer and his worst in the decade, has propelled the critics and media to write obituaries for the Federer-dominated era in tennis. But is it really signals the end of an era in tennis?

In common tennis norms, Federer is in the twilight of his playing career. He is 31 and not playing his best tennis at the moment. He hasn’t won a single Grand Slam in this year and, for the first time in so many years, he will be out of ATP top four. Even when his movements were hampered by the mononucleosis bout, he was able to win multiple Grand Slams and Masters tournaments on the tour.

For a long time, only one opponent was able to match the aura of Federer – the King of Clay, Rafael Nadal. His struggle against Rafael Nadal on clay was another talking point for tennis pundits and fans. When the rivalry translated to other surfaces, Federer sometimes matched up with the ferocious forehands of Nadal, but often wilted under the pressure exerted by the Spaniard. The Federer-Nadal rivalry has given us numerous classic and epic matches that will be in the tennis folklore for a very long time.

Fans were resigned to the slump against Nadal; but in the last few years, many others have found a chink in the armour of Federer. Or we should say the armour has become rusty enough to allow the like of Djokovic, Murray and even lesser-known players to invade and conquer. The frequency and magnitude of the losses is what prompted the critics to write off the dominance of Federer in the coming years.

One may wonder if it is really easy to predict the future of tennis, whether a person will dominate the tour or not. There are so many instances where Federer himself has proven the critics wrong. After the thrashing from Nadal at French Open 2008 and the greatest Wimbledon final ever, they wrote him off mercilessly. Federer replied to this by capturing the only missing Grand Slam title from his show piece – the French Open in 2009 - and went on to win Wimbledon, thereby completing the Euro Slam. He also recaptured the number one ranking and created history with 17 Grand Slam titles.

Age is the factor that critics are pointing out, but that is baseless. There are so many players, Serena, Haas, Ferrer, Robredo, Mahut and Hewitt, who are above thirty and still playing matches and winning. Thirty has now become the ripe age to play and win tennis matches. So the claim of Federer being too old to play the game is just wrong.

Federer remains a shadow of his former self, but even now he is extremely fit. He can give almost all players on court a run for their money. Another great thing is he is choosing the tournaments wisely, as he has the liberty to skip a few Masters tournaments on the basis of completing 600 matches. So the fatigue factor doesn’t affect him much, unlike some others.

Another question that arises is who, except the Big Three, can challenge Federer. On his day, no one can match Roger Federer. The rest of the players, except Rafa, Djokovic and Murray, can hardly challenge Federer on a consistent basis.

If there is one point Federer will have to revise, it is his game. His forehand is still a lethal weapon, but it doesn’t have that consistency and precision. Federer fails to maintain the momentum and consistency throughout the game, which had cost him many important matches. The mounting unforced error tally as a game progress is another worry. If he can counter all these, then we will have the nonpareil Roger Federer back.

In the last few years, Federer has been proving the critics wrong. Even though Roger doesn’t need inspiration, he can take a look at the career graph of his arch nemesis. Rafael Nadal was relentlessly whipped by Novak Djokovic on multiple surfaces, lost his number one ranking and was injured and away from tour for seven months. Yet he came back and won French Open. It is different matter that he lost in the first round of Wimbledon to again be a victim of the critics.

Nadal can serve an as inspiration for Federer

Roger Federer doesn’t need the critics’ approval to play or win matches. He is not blocking the path of youngsters; and if they can’t beat him fair and square, it is their incompetency and a proof that Federer is much ahead of them. Winning or losing, it is entirely in Federer’s hand. He may or may not win another Grand Slam, but it is the game that we all want to see; the game that fills the onlooker with pride and joy – the superlative tennis from Roger Federer.