Federer's level of greatness or the health of the game?

So today I sent an email to Ivan Lendl. I know thats totally off topic but if you keep with me I'll explain. If Im lucky we (people of Seattle) might even get to meet him. Still with me? :)

So thanks to the ridiculous amount I pay for DishNetwork I was watching Arantxa Sanchez Vicario being interviewed on Tennis Channel. During a commercial break Ivan Lendl had some great analysis on who the best ever mens player is. Great deal right? Even the commercial breaks have these neat tidbits.

Vicario
So anyway the whole tennis community these days has taken Federer's achievements for granted - they talk about his greatness and his potential for future greatness in the same breath. Oh so he's closing in on his 12th title - he can go ahead to 20+. Rolex is running a new print ad with the words "Let's not talk history yet. He's still making it"!

Personally, I have no doubt that Federer already is one of the greatest - he doesnt ever need to win the French to prove anything. Hes going for a record 4th consecutive US Open which would be a first since 1923 when Bill Tilden did it. His record at Wimbledon speaks for itself. Even though Im a big fan of Federer and the artistry of his play, I'd like to focus more on the health of the game. Sure Fed-Ex rolls on but a hobbling Nadal came very close to unseating Federer from his grassy throne. Then Djokovic beat Federer in a cliff hanger in Montreal. Did you know he had the audacity to lure Federer in with a drop shot and then hit a lob; twice! Both times in the deciding tie break (including match point)

He has continued to impress while Nadal seems to be having a bad start to his summer hard court season. There's also the other usual suspects that you can throw in the mix - the deft Murray who cant do much without his wrist healing completely.

There's Gasquet who hits a backhand like he developed it in his mothers womb (sorry, it is starting to look even better than Henin's).

Interestingly you can can add Stepanek to the mix as well - after all he is free from the curse of "being with Hingis". I was really impressed with the way Stephanek played in the first set of his semi against Federer in Montreal... he really served and volleyed well and took it to Federer using his return game.

Roddick has been really un-impressive. Seems like people have figured out that the best way to neutralize his serve is to chip it back off both sides (straight from a page in Fed's book). His ground strokes really sit up and lack depth and thats not a good thing on the fast Flushing Meadow's courts where short sitters will really be punished.

You can see that Federer is the measuring stick in each case. You have to measure up or get wiped out, as Blake did in the Cincinnati finals. NY is the stage, Federer is the lead actor with all the others as an ensemble vying for the best supporting actor's role. Whether they get the part or not depends more on the state of their respective wrists, abs, forehands, serves etc etc. Its all in the mind... whoever is fearless and catches Fed on a bad day (not to be confused with the one that cuts rates... its been having lots of bad days :p) will triumph.

Whether Federer has a bad day is another topic... the man has raised perfection to an art form. Its whether the ensemble cast has the mental strength (physical fitness assumed) to challenge Federer. He is so used to his opponents being in his awe that I guess it is a bit unusual for him when someone other than Nadal raises their game and actually presents him with a strong challenge. However, getting to be the best supporting actor is totally different from upstaging the lead actor :)

Djokovic just did it... can someone else do it? Can Roddick feed of the crowd? Can Nadal shake off his dismal US season and rebound? Can Murray exorcise his inner demons and forget that he injured his wrist. Or can Djokovic get over the fact that he managed to beat Federer, Nadal and Roddick in succession to winning Montreal. These are all very intriguing questions... I cant wait for the answers and watch the drama unfold in primetime technicolor with HD and dolby surround. Yes, I will be there myself but only for the first Sunday. The rest of the saga will have to be watched on TV.

Anways, back to my original thought. So Lendl mentioned Laver, Sampras and Federer as candidates for the best ever title. He feels that Federer really needs to win the French. No surprises there. He also said that if Federer goes on to win 20 slams without winning the French then the equation changes. I sent in my comments to him along with an invitation to attend an Amazon.com fishbowl. Fishbowls are very small employee only events where artists share their thoughts as they are about to launch a book, music etc. Lets see if Lendl responds :) For my own selfish sake I hope he accepts.

The lead role

And the ensemble





Maybe I will follow up with an analysis of the women's game