I Still Think Roger Federer Is The Greatest Player of All Time. Am I In Denial?
It’s hard for me to pinpoint when I first became a fan of Roger Federer. It wasn’t when he first made his mark on the tennis world, stunning reigning Wimbledon champion Pete Sampras in the round of 16 of the 2001 tournament. It wasn’t even two years later, when he lifted the trophy on the hallowed ground of that same Center Court, Wimbledon champion for the first time. As best I can remember, it was sometime during the summer of 2005, where he would rack up a stunning 81–4 win/loss record for the season, still the second best winning percentage in tennis’ Open Era. He would win a third straight Wimbledon, and a second straight U.S. Open. Even then it seemed destined that he would overtake the legends of the past like Sampras, Borg, and Agassi as the greatest to ever play the sport. But now, his hard won status at the mountaintop is seemingly starting to erode. As his rivals start to creep up on his greatest records, it becomes harder and harder for this Federer fan to let go.
As it would so happen, as I became aware of Federer’s status atop the throne of tennis, it would be at the same time that a challenger would rise up to be seemingly the only player in the world who could take Federer on. Rafael Nadal, a teenage Spaniard who seemed to be a bull given human form, would deny Federer his first French Open title, something he would go on to do for the next three years. I came of age as the tennis hierarchy that has persisted for the next fifteen years was starting to take shape- Federer and Nadal, together atop tennis’ Mount Olympus (later to be joined by Novak Djokovic and Andy Murray). For the first several years of that rivalry the hierarchy was reflected in the rankings just as perfectly as in my own mind: Federer at world no. 1, Nadal just behind at world no.2.
Even as the years crept on Federer would begin to trade places at no.1 with Nadal and Djokovic, and at times Murray, for me the rankings were stuck in 2007- no one could displace Federer. Sure, Nadal was the unmatched King of Clay, no question. Novak Djokovic racked up Australian Open titles like they were going out of style. But Federer just kept doing enough to hold on to keep his legacy ahead of theirs. He cemented his status as the King of Grass by bringing his total of Wimbledon titles up to eight. He made return after improbable return to the top of the rankings, his last at the amazing age of thirty-six. And, for now at least, his record of twenty grand slam titles stands as the most in the Open Era.
But many of these records, the last most especially, feel more precarious than ever. Rafael Nadal has just been crowned U.S. Open champion, bringing his slam total to nineteen, just shy of Federer. Novak Djokovic handed Federer a heartbreaking defeat in the finals of Wimbledon (Federer held two match points on his serve) to bring his total up to sixteen. With both of these men several years younger than Federer and having started their careers later, it seems almost inevitable that they will surpass Federer’s slam count sooner or later. In Nadal’s case it could be as soon as next year. The voice in my head saying Federer isn’t the greatest anymore will become harder and harder to ignore.
Why is it so hard for me to process this? On an aesthetic level, I simply enjoy what Federer does in a way that no other athlete, let alone any other tennis player, can match. The forehand that David Foster Wallace once described as a “liquid whip.” The elegant single handed backhand that Federer has worked so hard to transform from his Achilles heel in matchups against Nadal to arguably Rafa’s kryptonite in their most recent encounters off of clay. The sniper rifle of a serve, the crisp volleys. As I became a fan of watching Federer, I made the difficult transition in my own tennis game from a double to a single hander in an effort to (as best I could) remake my own game in Federer’s image.
As much as I respect Djokovic and Nadal, I don’t find much aesthetically pleasing in their games. And yet, the future of tennis seems to belong to them, as nearly all of the younger players on the ATP tour play a variation of the consistent, double handed backhand, efficient baseline style of play that Djokovic especially has perfected. The single hander that is such a key aspect of the beauty of Federer’s game seems to be vanishing outside of the very welcome exceptions that are promising youngsters Stefanos Tsitsipas and Denis Shapovalov. Whenever a Grand Slam has its junior boys’ tournament underway, I always look at the pages of the top seeds, the supposed top future talents. I am looking for one thing and one thing only, to see if they have “one handed” under the tab that says “backhand.” Ever since Tsitsipas and Shapovalov have transitioned to the men’s game, all of my searches have been in vain. Part of why I hope that Federer stays considered the greatest of all time is the hope, however fleeting it might seem, that his legacy will inspire at least one or two members of each new generation of tennis greats to want to pattern their strokes after his.
In the end, I don’t think my bias in favor of ranking Federer as the greatest is indefensible just yet. He still has the slam record, and could still add to it. He still holds the record for most total weeks at world no.1 (though Djokovic could potentially break it), and most consecutive weeks at no1 (237), which is a streak of unsurpassed dominance that, at this stage of their careers, Djokovic and Nadal will almost certainly not break. And he still has Wimbledon and his crown as King of Grass, perhaps the most dear of all to his own heart. For the time being, Federer’s statistical case as the greatest has yet to be surpassed as well. But, for me, I will always consider Federer as the greatest for reasons more that are far more to do with aesthetics than statistics. And that will never change, even when the numbers do.
