|
September 16, 2007
Federer has no match
Woods, Bryant, Manning, Tomlinson and others merit consideration, but all take a back seat to the tennis star in a discussion about the world's greatest athletes.
By Kurt Streeter, Los Angeles Times
Tiger Woods, it's time to step up your game.
Kobe Bryant, you too.
LaDainian Tomlinson, Peyton Manning, Shaquille O'Neal, Alex Rodriguez,
you've all got a ways to go if you're going to catch up to the greatest
athlete on Earth.
That would be none other than Roger Federer, the finely tuned
26-year-old forehand machine who one week ago today, after a Houdini
final, held aloft the tall U.S. Open trophy for the fourth straight
time.
Roger Federer?
"No question in my mind, Roger is the best athlete in the world," Pete
Sampras said on the phone the other day. If form holds, next year he'll
break Sampras' all-time Grand Slam event championship tally of 14. It
took Sampras 12 years to set that record. Federer will have surpassed
it in five.
He doesn't have height that casts a long shadow or muscles that shout at you.
He is of average stature, a shade over 6 feet and about 20 pounds below
200. He hails from Basel, Switzerland, and plays a country club sport
with the airy elegance of white linen wafting in the breeze. Pass him
on the street and you don't think sports stud, you think runway model.
This guy, at the top of the list?
You bet.
Nudge Woods, chances are he'll agree. He and Federer have become
buddies, bonding over prowess. This year, Federer visited Woods at a
golf tournament in Florida. "It's pretty neat when you have probably
the most dominant athlete on the planet out there in your gallery,"
Woods told reporters. "What he has done over the last three years is
pretty good."
That's a pretty good understatement.
In July 2003, Federer won his first Grand Slam tournament title:
Wimbledon. That started a run of excellence he carries on to this day.
He has claimed 11 more Grand Slam event championships and held the top
ranking in his sport with a relentless grip.
Here in the United States, though, where pro tennis ranks down next to
televised poker in popularity, Federer isn't getting the recognition he
deserves for pure athletic genius. Ask an average fan, and he'll list
Federer well below Bryant, LeBron James or Woods.
Federer is underestimated in much the same way skinny, sly Wayne
Gretzky was sold short. He performs with the stealth of a world-class
pickpocket. In any one of his matches there will be a point where you
rub your eyes and wonder, "Wait a minute, did I just see that? What did
he just do?"
Yes, he did get to that ball. Yes, he did get it back at that angle. Yes, that was a winner he just hit.
And then he does something that fools you into thinking it's all very
easy. Casually, he strolls about, hardly dropping any sweat, prepping
for the next point with the detached visage of a limo driver waiting at
the airport for his next ride.
It's part of his mental approach, but it does not get much notice in
our over-hyped world. TV just doesn't get it. Watch the highlights of
any sport, and what do you find? Not much nonchalance. Instead, a
heaping dose of fly-through-the-lane dunks, line-of-scrimmage blowups
and home runs launched so far into the sky they appear to rewrite the
laws of nature.
That a tennis player could be the world's greatest natural athlete simply flies in the face of SportsCenter.
Sampras agrees.
"The problem is, tennis just doesn't get the respect it deserves," he
said. "I know for a fact you've got to be fast, quick, strong . . . the
hand-eye coordination has to be there. You're battling against the
elements out there, for four hours sometimes, all by yourself,
struggling to find a way to win. Roger has it all, the whole package."
It's a remarkably reliable package. Since 2004, along with all those Slams, his win-loss record is 299-21.
Hello.
Who can top that? Bryant will score 81 points and look like Superman,
but without O'Neal, he can't get his team past the first round in the
playoffs.
Maybe Woods comes closest to Federer, but can the world's greatest athlete be a guy who doesn't have to run or jump?
Moreover, in the toughest moments, too often Woods comes up
inexplicably short. This year alone, he lost the Masters to an Iowan
we'd never heard of and the U.S. Open to a beer-bellied Argentine who
sucked on cigarettes between rounds.
Lose a big tournament to a fat guy who smokes and, I'm sorry, you can't hold the top spot.
Basel's favorite son does have a weakness. In the last two French Open
finals he couldn't beat muscular Rafael Nadal or the dusty red clay.
But Jimmy Connors never made a single French final. Neither did Boris
Becker. Neither did Sampras.
When Federer plays well, he says it feels as if he is flying. The
victories happen with speedy, clear precision. On the flip side, when
times are tough and the winds are swirling and another geeked-up
opponent is jamming in serves that fall from the clouds, Federer almost
invariably keeps his cool.
This year, in the finals of both Wimbledon and the U.S. Open, he dodged
his way through trouble -- hitting winners when he needed to, and then
having the good sense to let his opponents overcook.
Sampras said he wasn't surprised at the tightly contested Open final
against upstart Novak Djokovic, a match Federer could have lost if he
hadn't held his nerve.
"The great ones, when they are not playing at the top of their game,
they find a way to win," Sampras declared. "It's just another notch for
Roger, another sign of greatness."
Genius has a way of recognizing genius.
In the zone Roger Federer has been
dominant the last four seasons, winning 12 of his 13 Grand Slam titles
during that time. His record the last four years (Note: Federer still
plans to play five more events this year):
* 2007…52-6
* 2006…92-5
* 2005…81-4
* 2004…74-6
|