I just watched the men’s final of Wimbledom Tournament between Roger Federer & Andy Roddick. It is one of the best matches I have ever seen. The Wimbledon has a rule that the final 5th set has no tiebreak. It continues to play until a player wins two consecutive games. The final score is 5-7 7-6(8-6) 7-6(7-5) 3-6 16-14. In other words, the 5th set lasted 30 games, equivalent to three sets of play & the match lasted more than four hours. In the end, Federer prevailed. In the last few games, you can tell Federer played a little bit better & had better serves. He broke the record set by Pete Sampras (14 slam titles) by winning 15 slam titles. It was very enjoyable when you watched the match on high definition TV & you hate to go back to the old TV. Most modern players glue to the baseline & hit the ball hard to find the court opening for a winning shot. The speed of the serve also makes the serve crucial to the game. If you have a fast (> 140 mph) & consistent first serve, you make your serve difficult to return & win an easy point. It is like 12-yard penalty kick in the soccer game. The kicker has much better chance to beat the goalkeeper. When time goes by, the physical condition of the human being is getting stronger, but the responding time can’t catch up. This is the problem of the modern tennis. It becomes very boring when the server keeps scoring the point without any other shots, no forehand, backhand, lob or volley. This is especially true when you watch men’s double match. The court is the same size, but the men’s strength, speed & height keep improving. This makes the server’s side having a distinctive advantage. It gets very boring when you see them serve & volley, just two strokes to end the point.
In 1968, I bought a b/w TV. I watched Joe Payne Show for relax & then I found the tennis programs on TV. It was a time when Australians ruled the tennis world. I watched the matches among Rod Laver, John Newcombe, Tony Roche, Ken Rosewell, Roy Emerson & Fred Stoley. These Australians were great & the style was elegant & versatile. They played all around court, used various shot & stroke with a lot of variations. Nowadays players stick to the baseline & rarely advance to volley. I think the shorter mean-free-path of the volley & the speed of balls make the reaction not fast enough to do volley effectively & consistently. So when time goes by, the tennis has to change. Otherwise, it will get boring to watch & lose the viewers. We all know most American don’t like to watch soccer. The reason is that it gets very boring to see 0-0 score at the end of the game & has to be decided by 12-yard kick. Nobody likes this since it is not fair or convincing to decide which team is better by this kind of kick---goalkeeper has little chance but resolve to luck. If the tennis match has to be decided by the serve & the hitting speed from the baseline, it loses much of its luster.
The Grand Slam of tennis is confusing because people use it without precise definition. The Slam Tournaments of Tennis are the following tournaments: Australian, French, Wimbledon & US, all open tournaments. The most prestige achievement is the Grand Slam---winner of all four Slam tournaments in a same calendar year. This is the Great Grand Slam, because later people coin some other terms like Consecutive Grand Slam (winning all 4 slams not in the same year but in consecutive year) & Career Grand Slam (winning all 4 slams not in the fashion of previous two Grand Slams). There are only two men achieved Grand Slams: Don Budge (1938) & Rod Laver (1962 & 1969).
In this Wimbledon final, it is interesting to see Bjorn Borg, Rod Laver, & Pete Sampras sat in the royal box. They were also interviewed with McEnroe after the match. Someone said Federer might be the best & greatest player in history. Sampras voiced that two Grand Slams may be the most difficult to achieve. He implied that Rod Laver should be the greatest tennis player in history so far. I tend to agree with Pete. It is extremely hard to play consistently well on various courts (grass, clay, asphalt or hard(acrylic or synthetic)) & maintain top physical condition. There are so many good players in the field & some of them sooner or later will play their best match in their top physical condition. Can we guarantee that we don't get sick or contract some flu in a year? Wait, what happen to Raphael Nadal? He was absent in the Wimbledon tournament. Since he beat Federer last year, Federer may be just lucky to win his 15 slams (career grand slams). I think the way Nadal plays make it easier to injure himself. He can beat Federer when he is in top condition. However, sooner or later, he will get injured and prevent him from playing. This is exactly the reason why Federer won French & Wimbledon this year when Nadal injured his knee. The true champion is the one who plays with style consistently with smooth strokes, without being push around most of the time & so he has less chance to get injured & be able to maintain top condition physically all year round. From the above view points, grand slam no wonder must be the most prestige achievement a tennis player can accomplish. Rod Laver achieved it & achieved it twice.
I found some video clips that you can see the play style of Rod Laver & Roger Federer.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AR7do5BFgzA
This is Federer & Nadal. No 1 & 2 players in 2009.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wHaN2h21ANs
This is Rod Laver & Tony Roche, No 1 & 3 players in 1969.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ePo6KcGQd4M&feature=related
This is Rod Laver & John Newcombe, No 1 & 2 players in 1969.
Tom Watson is 59 & he competed in the British Golf Open Tournament. He played brilliantly until the last hole & last stroke when he missed a 8-feet putt. Instead, Stewart Cink played obscurely for three days. But he made a 12-foot birdie at the last 18th hole. In other words, the final putt or the last stroke defines & creates a champion. This is not the first time we have seen the top players succumb to the pressure or can’t finish the job in a graceful manner. Watson was able to hole a 60-feet putt but couldn’t do the same for a 8-feet one. It was almost painful to watch the finish & really felt sorry for Watson. He is a great champion. One or two more wins will not change his life much. However, if you want to fulfill your life & make something memorable, you have to play with seriousness & perseverance in a crucial moment. This needs physical & mental toughness. But the difference of outcome can be huge. If Watson made the last putt, he won the tournament & became the oldest champion in the golf history. If you look at the replay, he seemed not ready mentally & delivered a shoddy putt hastily. Perhaps it was too much emotion drainage (not lacking mental toughness) that betrayed him at the final moment.
