Why Roger needs Nadal
If Roger Federer does go on to become the greatest player of all time, he will have a lot to thank Rafael Nadal for.
"God, it's killing me," admitted the emotional world number two after his dramatic five-set defeat in Sunday's Australian Open final.
But while the losses are painful, victories in what is already one of sport's greatest rivalries are priceless.
Nadal has certainly slowed Federer's seemingly unstoppable progress towards Pete Sampras's mark of 14 Grand Slam titles, but he has made the value of any future major wins so much greater.
When a 25-year-old Federer beat Fernando Gonzalez to win his 10th major title in Australia two years ago, there seemed little prospect of him falling short of Sampras.
True, Federer had lost to Nadal in the previous year's French Open final and the Spaniard looked set to make camp in Paris for years to come, but few would have foreseen his ability to transfer that form to hard courts and even grass.
Before the summer of 2007, Federer had beaten the likes of Roddick, Safin, Hewitt, Philippoussis, Baghdatis and Gonzalez in Grand Slam finals… good players all, some very good, but none of those players could be called great, even though they have five Grand Slam titles between them.
Sampras, on the other hand, had Andre Agassi. He beat his fellow American in four Grand Slam finals and lost in another, as well as defeating Boris Becker in a Wimbledon final and losing to Stefan Edberg at the 1992 US Open. Those three alone managed 20 major wins.
For Federer, the last two years have been harder going as he has lost to Nadal at the French Open, Wimbledon and now the Australian Open.
Victories over Djokovic and Murray in successive US Open finals have kept the Grand Slam counter ticking over for the Swiss, but if he is to get through the magic 14 barrier and beyond he will surely have to end his recent barren run against Nadal in the major finals.
Indeed, with six Grand Slam titles to his name on all three surfaces, the 22-year-old Nadal might be a better bet to outdo Sampras.
We should not forget that there are others who could make a case for the greatest tag. After all, Agassi managed what none of his contemporaries could by completing the set of Wimbledon, US, French and Australian Open titles - and Rod Laver won 11 majors which included two calendar Grand Slams in 1962 and 1969, either side of his amateur exile.
It was Laver who handed the trophy to Nadal on Sunday and his achievement is surely something even the two current superstars of the sport will struggle to ever match.
But Federer will get more chances to match Sampras, with a possible rematch against Nadal at Wimbledon this summer something to savour on a freezing February day in London.
-Truly Copied
"God, it's killing me," admitted the emotional world number two after his dramatic five-set defeat in Sunday's Australian Open final.
But while the losses are painful, victories in what is already one of sport's greatest rivalries are priceless.
Nadal has certainly slowed Federer's seemingly unstoppable progress towards Pete Sampras's mark of 14 Grand Slam titles, but he has made the value of any future major wins so much greater.
When a 25-year-old Federer beat Fernando Gonzalez to win his 10th major title in Australia two years ago, there seemed little prospect of him falling short of Sampras.
True, Federer had lost to Nadal in the previous year's French Open final and the Spaniard looked set to make camp in Paris for years to come, but few would have foreseen his ability to transfer that form to hard courts and even grass.
Before the summer of 2007, Federer had beaten the likes of Roddick, Safin, Hewitt, Philippoussis, Baghdatis and Gonzalez in Grand Slam finals… good players all, some very good, but none of those players could be called great, even though they have five Grand Slam titles between them.
Sampras, on the other hand, had Andre Agassi. He beat his fellow American in four Grand Slam finals and lost in another, as well as defeating Boris Becker in a Wimbledon final and losing to Stefan Edberg at the 1992 US Open. Those three alone managed 20 major wins.
For Federer, the last two years have been harder going as he has lost to Nadal at the French Open, Wimbledon and now the Australian Open.
Victories over Djokovic and Murray in successive US Open finals have kept the Grand Slam counter ticking over for the Swiss, but if he is to get through the magic 14 barrier and beyond he will surely have to end his recent barren run against Nadal in the major finals.
Indeed, with six Grand Slam titles to his name on all three surfaces, the 22-year-old Nadal might be a better bet to outdo Sampras.
We should not forget that there are others who could make a case for the greatest tag. After all, Agassi managed what none of his contemporaries could by completing the set of Wimbledon, US, French and Australian Open titles - and Rod Laver won 11 majors which included two calendar Grand Slams in 1962 and 1969, either side of his amateur exile.
It was Laver who handed the trophy to Nadal on Sunday and his achievement is surely something even the two current superstars of the sport will struggle to ever match.
But Federer will get more chances to match Sampras, with a possible rematch against Nadal at Wimbledon this summer something to savour on a freezing February day in London.
-Truly Copied
|
|
