So many things to blog about this weekend, where to start?
Well, nothing pleased me more this weekend than seeing Roger Federer win the Aussie Open.
Murray was never going to seriously rattle the great Roger, in my opinion.
Fed’s playing with absolutely no pressure, now that he’s passed Sampras for career Grand Slams.
Which doesn’t sound like a good thing for the rest of the field this year.
Some say Fed is past his prime.
Well, that may be true, cos I think he was at his absolute zenith circa ’04 to ’06.
But no matter, he’s still the best tennis player in the world right now anyway…and quite possibly the greatest there ever was.
Some say he’s playing in a weak era compared to Sampras.
Hello?
Firstly, your greatness is defined by how good you are over your generation.
Of course, great rivalries make for great legacies (in the way Ali was “fortunate” to have Foreman and Frazier to define his legacy).
Fed too, had his great rival in Nadal…and it is perhaps a tad unfortunate that Nadal seemed to have Fed’s number most of the time.
It’s the same thing for the Jordan argument – was Jordan’s era a weak era?
I don’t think so.
Jordan’s era had Barkley, Wilkins, Robinson, Malone, Drexler, Ewing, Olajuwon, Miller, etc…it’s just that he was so dominant that he made every one else look second best.
Same goes for Federer.
Secondly, how could you say that an era with the likes of Djokovic, Murray, Nadal (albeit an ailing one), Tsonga, Roddick and Del Potro is a weak one?
I don’t think it’s a weak era at all.
Which makes Federer’s accomplishments all the more incredible.
He just manages to put himself in a position to win every time.
Go Fed!
