.
.

On takes at Federer’s grass prowess

I am not talking about the drug here. Just to clarify. He isn’t putting any thing fishy in the bottle in the above picture either. How do I know? I have my sources.

Federer has been dominant on grass and we all know about that. He has now equalled the Borg record for consecutive wins on the surface. People are not satisfied though. The common point raised is - Federer doesn’t have to deal with as competetive a scenario as Sampras or Borg had to. Borg had his fierce rivals we know about. Even Sampras had guys like Agassi, Rafter, Ivanisevic.

Who does Federer have in comparison? Hewitt, Roddick. Big question marks over Nadal and Safin on grass. I feel this is a bit unfair. The career of these players isn’t over. We do not know how Roddick or Hewitt or some one else from the current era will be looked back upon. So we should wait a while before comparing Federer’s accomplishments on the surface with past greats.

It is no small feat to equal the record of consecutive wins. Sampras, for all his grass court prowess and great wins, couldn’t manage it. Federer has. It will be fascinating to compare the two players over all once Federer retires taking the full career of the two into account. Sampras didn’t win the French. He won X titles but not title A. On the other hand, Federer won Y titles plus B,C should not be forgotten. What will be equally fascinating will be matching up the two players on how they would fare on grass versus each other.

Federer did defeat Sampras in a Wimbledon at such a young age - a match which is now part of the folklore of tennis. But who would have won more had they lived in the same time? Could any of these two players, known for their domination, dominate the other over all? How would the almost complete Federer game match up with the unplayable Sampras serve on clutch points? For now, we should cherish that we can see Federer playing live and hope some one does up his game to create a memorable Wimbledon.

Tags: , , , .

Leave a Reply