Firstly, apologies for the long absence. I have been very busy with work and did not have much time to blog forcing a break of sorts.

Coming back to the topic at hand.. strong and diverse opinions are usually among sports fans and in sports columns on who should be the sports person of the year around this time of the year. for 2006 though, the answer seems obvious as Roger Federer has had a near perfect year with 3 grand slam wins and a dream win-loss record of 92-5. Yet, we find sports awards going to people other than Roger Federer and some people are, as a result, not happy about this. Chris Baldwin of travelgolf.com writes:

…athlete of the year deserves to go to …, the most dominant athlete in any sport. That without question is tennis’ Roger Federer….

Tiger Woods winning AP Male Athlete of the Year only proves how embarrassingly provincial Americans can be. Too bad there aren’t enough U.S. sports fans like Tiger and me who can see the entire sports world.

It is no secret that this is true regarding Americans, particularly where sport is concerned. They focus mostly on US sports and hardly on sports from around the world. However, I do not see why this should be a reason to be agitated about. English football fans focus much more, or in a lot of cases, almost entirely on their own league. Even when we analyse teams sports fans follow, a lot of people only keep indepth track of their own team and not the entire league be it any sport. The basic nature of sport is that you root for you own team and revel in the roller coaster ride following a team provides.

When a sports award does the same, it shouldn’t cause any alarm. The Associated Press has been awarding the Americans for many years now and it is nothing new. BBC gives out a similar award and to compensate, they also gives out the overseas version.

Perhaps it is best that we accept there will be natural bias in awards, one which any group or panel cannot avoid. Even the Laureus award conferred by a very international panel cannot be said to be unbiased. We do not have a nominee from each country in the panel and each member of the panel cannot be expected to know the weightage of each achievement in various sports. If we look at the award winners, they are popular sports persons from more main stream sports. It is arguably the best award out there and yet it cannot be said that it can be bereft of biases.

Awards help celebrate sporting achievements and that should be that. The real trophies have already been won - on the sporting field.

People say that there is no love lost between these two. I can only see the love.

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.

How else can you explain Federer facing a match point against Olivier Rochus or this? Sport is a leveller and we see that every day.

CNN tracks Federer’s progress on grass this week:

Federer had struggled all week here beating Indian qualifier Rohan Bopanna 7-6 6-2 in the first round before battling over three sets to defeat France’s Richard Gasquet 7-6 6-7 6-4.

On a given day, any individual or team can defeat any one else. We think that the oft stated any thing can happen in sport is not always true. Then, we see Bangladesh defeat Australia in tests and Senegal defeat France in football. We know instantly that any thing can indeed happen in sport.

It always occurs when we least expect it. The unpredictability is thrilling and is one of the many factors which draws us to sport. It is a far more important aspect than we usually realise.

While Mexico won a crucial game 3-1 versus Iran which should take them to round 2 on Day 3 of the WC, I will take a moment to focus on Nadal and his French triumph. Nadal has dominated like few have in tennis history this clay court season. Indeed, it can be seen as he has notched up the consecutive victories on clay record while remaining unbeaten through the season. Despite Nadal being the favourite to win the match versus Federer, a lot of people, including me backed Federer to win the the tournament. Perhaps there was a feeling that Federer would have the last laugh. After all, Federer does know a trick or two about tennis!

It looked like Federer could for a few moments as Federer took the first set 6-1. That would be all though, as Nadal claimed the French Open for the second consecutive time. No one will grudge Nadal as it would be a pity from the Nadal viewpoint if after such a fabulous season, he would have failed to win what really mattered. For Federer, it is his bad luck that he lives in the era of Nadal. Similarly, he is lucky he doesn’t live in the era of Sampras. Also, earlier eras have season superb clay court players as well - Muster and Kuerten most notably from the recent past. A champion has to stride over adversity and opponents and Federer knows that.

What will be interesting now - can Nadal up his game on other surfaces? The test will come as the grass court season starts. The tennis focus shifts to Wimbledon now. Don’t know how many of you will care though in the world cup madness!

Before the French Open started, Federer said that it was really between him and Nadal. While you are caught in the world cup euphoria, please do not forget to watch this match.

The two have faced each other in tough matches all through the clay court season. Nadal has come up triumphs all the time. Will seven be the lucky match for Federer? I do hope so. Being a huge Federer fan right from the time he beat Sampras in Wimbledon, it will be delightful to see Federer claim his greatest victory. The losses early on in the season to Nadal, Nadal’s clay court winning streak and every thing else will mean nothing for Nadal if he fails to win Roland Garros. This is the only thing which matters when we look back down the years and what people play for - the big titles.

I don’t have much to add on this apart from what I have already said. Some of the lots I have written on the topic:

• Nadal-Federer: Agassi Sampras II?
• Nadal vs Federer VI Preview
• Nadal-Federer

Apart from backing Federer, my gut feeling tells me that he will win. Here is what some other fans feel.

Who do you feel will win?

The French Open is my favourite grand slam ahead of Wimbledon - the battles fascinate me more than the quick matches we see on grass. This year though, the football and NBA has meant I haven’t been able to talk much on the French Open.

On the women’s side, the stories so far have seen Hingis outsed by Clijsters - showing she has a lot of work still left to do in her tryst with destiny. The biggest story has been Nicole Vaidisova though. Is she the next big thing in women’s tennis? Defeating Amelie Mauresmo and then striding over Venus Williams is no mean thing. The last four sees Vaidisova face the real test when she faces Svetlana Kuznetsova - the in form player at the moment and likely to go through to the finals. The other semi has another Belgian battle between Clijsters and Henine-Hardenne. It is a match for which no one seems to have any clue about who will advance - the ingredient which makes Clijsters-Henine encounters exciting prospects.

The big action is happening in the men’s side though. The top 4 seeds have all reached the semis. When you consider the history of players from no where reaching the last 4 - be it Michael Change, Thomas Muster or Gustavo Kuerten, it is amazing to have the four best players on paper coming to the party. More importantly, Nadal and Federer look all set for the show down of the clay court season. Before that, Federer has to defeat a challenging David Nalbandian, one of the best clay court players in his own right.

Read the rest of this entry »

When I think of Pete Sampras, the first word which comes to my mind is clinical. The second, which Vijay Amritraj often reffered Sampras with, is champion. In sport, there is always the contemporary versus past debate. We always like to ponder over and even conclude wherever possible who the greatest ever has been. Is Tiger Woods better than Jack Nicklaus? Is the recent Australian cricket team even better than the invincibles of 1948 and the West Indies of the 80s? Did Lance Armstrong do enough to become the best ever in his sport? Is there ever going to be some one who is going to emerge as good as a Bobby Fischer, Mohammad Ali, Nadia Comaneci or a Don Bradman?

Aren’t all sporting competitions set to find out who the best is given the time and place? So dwelling over the greatest over eras is only natural. We even compare the greatest of various sports to try and evaluate the greatest sports persons to have graced us with their presence. So some one will argue that Michael Jordan was the greatest as he changed the face of basketball while others will go for Mohammad Ali as he stretched beyond sport itself while yet others while vouch for Bradman as his margin over cricketers in any era is vastly bigger compared to any sportsperson in his or her sport.

Read the rest of this entry »

The Laureus Sports Awards, commonly acknowledged as the sports oscars have been announced. Federer wins the award for a second consecutive time. Croatian skier Janica Kostelic is the women’s winner after a fourth Winter Olympic gold. Tennis dominates the awards list as Hingis takes the comeback of the year while Nadal takes the newcomer of the year.

For Federer to challenge for the title next year, I suspect he has to stride over some one whom he has never beaten on clay - and he says that he is ready.

Nadal has equalled the record of Vilas.

CNNSI Reports:

Rafael Nadal equalled Guillermo Vilas’ record of 53 consecutive claycourt wins when he beat Roger Federer 6-7 7-6 6-4 2-6 7-6 in the final of the Rome Masters.

Nadal’s victory, his fourth in a row over the Swiss world number one, made him the first player to win back-to-back titles in the Italian capital since Thomas Muster of Austria in 1995-96.

Was it one of the best matches ever on clay? Probably. The stakes were high as I mentioned yesterday. I said then:

This one promises to be another cracker.

It sure was! Federer came the closest he has ever come to beating Nadal on clay. That Nadal won was only apt though. It would have been a shame if he would have failed to equal Vilas after such a tremendous run. The setup - facing Federer for the Rome Masters finals at the backdrop of Federer in the midde of loosing streak to Nadal could not have been better scripted.

Read the rest of this entry »