I hated Roger Federer. I hated him about as much as you can hate an athlete. Probably Bill Belichick is the only man in sports who I hated as much (yes, both are partly out of a fear/respect I have for the brilliance of each). I hated the way Roger played (his one-handed backhand basically a way of Federer sucking up to the old-timers). I hated the way he dressed (a belt and white sports-jacket and sports-khakis when coming on court in Wimbledon?). I hated the way he was really cocky and arrogant ("I was a treat to watch today" he once said). More than anything, I hated the way that no one else seemed to really hate him for those reasons, especially the tennis media, who all collectively decided to name him the Greatest Player ever before he even eclipsed Sampras' mark of 14 Slam titles. I hated Roger Federer about as much as I liked Rafael Nadal.
I no longer hate that man. I actually like him now. Roger Federer has become one of the most interesting figures in individual sports, a robot turned romantic. Roger Federer, much like his friend Tiger Woods, is seeing his kingdom being taken over, albeit in slightly different ways. There is no man out there close to Tiger's 14 major wins, but there are youngsters all over that can hit with him any day. Federer's kingdom is much closer to being overthrown, with Rafael Nadal closing in on his 16 majors not to mention the ever-increasingly one-sided personal rivalry, which has gone from 13-7 to 17-8 in over a year. However, in his slow decline from inhuman to very much human, Federer has become a sypathetic lovable figure - the man trying to hold on to what he had.
The moment I truly realized that I had become something of a Federer supporter (I should make it clear that I still wanted Nadal to beat Federer in the French Open Final, as I will in any match between the two) was in his match with Djokovic, the unbeatable man. I had always been a fan of Djokovic (again, I will always want Nadal to beat him), as I thought he was unfairly criticized for not winning titles when he simply wasn't as talented as Federer and Nadal from 2007-2010. I liked seeing Djokovic running away in Australia, and then sweeping the American Masters events. That said, his undefeated run through the clay season made me terrified. I'm not scared and fearful of Djokovic eventually taking #1 for 2011, mainly because it is inevitable and he has little chance of keeping it in 2012. I was scared of Djokovic winning the French. It was time for that streak to stop, for him to taste defeat for the first time since last thanksgiving. And Federer was the perfect man to do it.
Six months is a long time in tennis. Six months earlier Djokovic was the man who fought and clawed his way to upset Roger Federer in a dramatic incredible US Open Semifinal, twice firing winners when Federer held match point (the climax of a year of many match-point chokes by Federer). Djokovic ruined a dream US Open final between Nadal and Federer, ending my hopes of Nadal not only winning the career slam, but the 'Beat-Federer-At-Every-Slam-Final' Slam. Six months later, it was Federer fighting to a huge upset over Djokovic at the French Open ruining what was the new dream final between Nadal and Djokovic. Federer was the man who played spoiler, something unimaginable two years earlier, when Federer was winning the summer French Open-Wimbledon double and he was in full dick mode. Federer was now the lovable underdog, the man everyone thought was done. There was no perfect player to finally end Djokovic's run, as Nadal said, "The best player of the history" beat "The best player of today."
When Federer finally finished off Djokovic, he wagged his finger, telling us all "that's for thinking I couldn't beat this punk" and let off a roar, a celebration that seemed so geniune. I used to hate Federer that he fell down after winning the umpteenth major title (he does this without even attempting to cry, which seperates him from Nadal who tears up every time he wins a major). I used to hate that Federer's celebrations seemed choreographed and fake. He used to put on jackets and coats, courtesy of Nike, that made him look more like a preppy tween in a yacht club than an athlete fresh off winning a physical battle. This reaction seemed totally real, about how any man would react in that situation. He was 0-5 in 2011 against Djokovic and Nadal. He had lost two straight semifinals to Novak Djokovic, including a three-set loss that was nowhere near as close as the score indicated in Australia. He was a huge underdog. It was a serious surprise to everyone that Federer ended the streak that easily. He was the third man in the trivalry. However, he was finally able to remind us that it is indeed a trivalry, that he is capable of running with the younger Djokovic and Nadal (well, not Nadal). Federer gave us one more amazing moment, and finally one that seemed truly special.
Roger Federer is the Greatest Player of the Open Era (you could easily make a case that Rod Laver was more dominant, winning 10 majors despite not being able to compete for 5 years of his prime). Roger Federer has put up numbers and streaks that won't be topped. Nadal may beat his 16 slams. Some guy may one day win 5 straight US Opens like Federer, or three majors in a year three times. However, those players will have to be amazingly special. The one record that probably will never be topped is the 23 straight semifinals at majors. In comparison, Nadal's longest streak is 5. All that understood, it took me until Federer became the underdog, old and tired, to make me truly appreciate him.
It probably has a lot to do with the fact that I no longer fear Roger Federer (I love how I'm talking like I am the one playing him). I am confident Rafael Nadal will win all their big meetings in best-of-5 matches (he's won the last four). I am no longer scared off the specter of Roger Federer the G.O.A.T. He's not that guy anymore. He has to fight to make a final to beat a guy who used to fight to beat him. Roger Federer has become someone who was questioned about his ability, about his age, about his future. He always said that people count him out too soon. Of course, the media and him have had this rodeo for three years, but back then Federer was 27. He's now nearing 30. He's now way behind Nadal and despite his win in Rolland Garros, Djokovic in the rankings. After all the revelry, he still did not win the French Open and played amazing tennis to win just a set in the final. He's now the fighter, the underdog, the man who wants one more crack at the crown.
Roger Federer is still arrogant. He still thinks he is better now than he is. He is still a worse player currently than Nadal and Djokovic. He easily could never win another major (in that vein, I don't want him to win another). However, seeing Roger Federer have to work hard and drag and claw his way in attempt to do so is captivating, is interesting, is enjoyable. Watching Roger Federer now is fun. He still has that level that no one can still match, but that level only lasts for four or five games at a time before "old" Federer (as in age) returns, with an error filled backhand and misplaced serve. Those four or five games are something to cherish, something to behold, to remember that no matter how many matches in a row Novak Djokovic wins, and no matter how many people eventually pass him in the rankings, Roger Federer is the best of all time. I like him now, but mainly because I like the fact that that version of Roger Federer is retired. The more interesting, captivating and geniune version is here to stay.
__________________________________________________________
Before we depart, I would like to touch upon two other tennis topics.
1.) Novak Djokovic's streak was so underappreciated. While it was going on, especially in the French Open, it was a big deal, but the second Federer beat him, he returned to the backseat. There was no talk of "How amazing was that 43 match winning streak!!", it was just "Federer's back!!!!". Novak Djokovic arrived early in a shallow part of tennis history where Nadal was winning the clay events and Federer was winning everything else (2006-2007). In that time, Djokovic made five consecutive semifinals at slams, becoming the youngest man to reach the semis in all four majors (in comparison, Andy Murray just accomplished that). He won a slam. Then he seemed to plateau for three years, still making deep runs in almost every slam (Quarterfinal or better in 15 of 17 slams). He could beat everyone but Federer and Nadal consistently. He was continually battered and slammed by the media for not winning more, while strangely the media loved Andy Murray who even before this years Australian Open had achieved about half of what Djokovic had. Last year's US Open semi was the turning point. He always played Federer close but often lost close set after close set. Finally, he fought back and won the late games in the 5th set. He eventually lost to Rafael Nadal in a US Open final of extremely high level tennis. That set it off.
Djokovic's run was incredible. He won seven events before June. He won a major and four Masters titles, which is a good career (Andy Roddick in his career has won one major and five masters titles). More than that, Djokovic killed Federer each time they met (Australia, Dubai and Indian Wells without dropping a set), and even more impressively beat Nadal each time (Indian Wells, Miami, Madrid and Rome - all in finals). Djokovic was 0-9 against Nadal in finals before 2011. He's now 4-9. He was 0-9 against Nadal on clay, and he's now 2-9, becoming the first man to beat Nadal on clay twice in one season, and the second to beat him twice on clay, period. Novak Djokovic grew up. His shots become better, sure, but he was always technically about perfect in every way except for his serve. What changed is his confidence. He believed he could beat Nadal and Federer and soon he believed he couldn't lose. His streak was snapped by the man who owns much of the other streaks in the history of the sport and it took a great effort to beat him. 43 matches gave him just one major, but I feel like Novak is still here to stay.
2.) Finally, there is Rafa. He didn't play well early in the tournament. What does a not-as-good Rafa still accomplish in the French Open: He wins the title with dropping just three sets, two in tiebreaks in the 1st round to Isner when he was serving out of his gourd. Rafael Nadal is basically what Federer used to be. He's now a man who everyone tries to find fault with, tries to find ways and explanations of why he will lose. I used to do it with Federer. Federer twice had to go five sets early in majors that he eventually won, much like Nadal. For Rafa, the tournament starts in the quarterfinals, and it was true here too, as he played B- tennis until the quarters and then eviscerated Soderling and Murray and beat Federer with Federer playing about as good as he can on clay. After all the smoke and clay settled, Rafael Nadal was the man holding the trophy, again. He will always be the man holding the trophy in Paris until someone beats him.
