Federer Is Greatest of All Time, for Now

Posted Jun 07, 2009 12:57PM By Greg Couch (RSS feed)

By the time he got off his knees, pulled his face out of his hands and reached into his pocket for the ball he would hit it to screaming fans, the tears were already flowing.

Five months ago, Roger Federer's tears were supposed to be the sign of his dismantling. On Sunday, they were about all that is good in tennis: Good guy. Doing things right. Overcoming. And they were also about history, and whether Federer is now the greatest player of all time.

First, the moment: Federer won the French Open Sunday, beating Robin Soderling 6-1, 7-6 (7-1), 6-4. He has shown us so much about the agony and ecstasy of sport in the past 12 months alone.

We've seen him celebrate. We've seen him cry. We've seen him, once a guy who never had a hair out of place, destroy a racket in anger. He has shared all of it, and there's just something more honorable about a guy fighting back than a guy who was placed for a lifetime on the mountaintop.

So when he was giggling on the trophy stand, and when he walked over to John McEnroe for the TV interview on NBC, still carrying that French Open cup like something he might take with him everywhere he goes from now on -- the grocery store, the dentist's chair -- well, it was OK.

But let's get to the GOAT argument. Is Federer now the Greatest Of All Time? Andre Agassi said so. And so did McEnroe, who asked Federer how it felt for people to say so.

"We don't know,'' Federer said. "Definitely, I have something going for me.''

Here's my opinion: Yes he is. But while I love a great crowning moment as well as anyone --and no, I'm not talking about the nutcase who ran onto the court during the match and tried to put a cap on Federer -- this goes down in pencil for now.

We live in the moment, not in history books. And Federer's moment is not finished. On Sunday, he tied Pete Sampras' record with 14 major titles. He has won the French now, on the red clay, and that's something Sampras never did.

But while I hate to bring up this small point, the moment needed Rafael Nadal. Or maybe history needed it, I'm not sure which.

The French Open was not the final hurdle for Federer's supremacy. Nadal is. Nadal has beaten Federer nine times in their 15 matches, five of seven in major finals. This Federer-Nadal rivalry should go on four or five more years, and when the story is finished, if Nadal keeps destroying Federer the way he has lately, then the pencil turns over and Federer's name is erased from the top line.

You cannot be the best player ever if you can't beat your rival.

"It wasn't Rafa on the other side of the net, but I beat him a couple weeks ago on clay,'' Federer said. "So I think I deserved it.''

Soderling beat Nadal last Sunday, knocking him out of the tournament he was trying to win for a record fifth straight time. Bjorn Borg, who won four straight, wrote a text message to Soderling to thank him. For now, a No. 2 ranking and a victory over a journeyman is not enough to put GOAT in ink.

It's impossible to know for sure, of course. Eras change, the game changes. You can't just count majors. When I was kid, people didn't bother to play the Australian Open. It was only in the late 1980s, when the tournament was moved from December to January that the tournament really mattered.

Rod Laver won two Grand Slams, meaning he won all four in the same year twice. Federer now has won what they're calling a career Grand Slam, meaning he has won all four over the course of his career. Laver missed several years of majors in the heart of his career, because he was a pro, and the majors wanted amateurs.

Borg belongs in the discussion. He won 11 majors, but never a U.S. Open or Australian. But he only bothered to play the Australian once. But those guys were from a different era. And this era is much, much deeper, with dozens of good, athletic players, rather than a handful.

Laver was too small to play today and Borg too thin. Advantage Federer. Sampras, who has been sending texts to Federer wishing him luck, played in the modern era, with modern scheduling, modern fitness, modern ease
of travel. And most importantly, the modern power rackets. And he never got past the semis of the French.

But Sampras dominated his rival, Andre Agassi. And that's what Federer has left.

He has beaten Nadal in two Wimbledon finals, but that during Nadal's rise. Federer was there first, and then Nadal took over while Federer, now 27, was still in his prime. Federer is going to have to beat him back. In the majors. In finals.

The GOAT cannot walk around with a hole in his psyche, his nerve, his confidence.

But that's a history argument, and don't let it take from Federer's great moment.

French Open Photos

Swiss Roger Federer kisses the trophy after winning against Swedish player Robin Soderling during their French Open tennis men's final match on June 7, 2009 at Roland Garros Stadium in Paris. Roger Federer won his 14th major on June 7, 2009 with victory over Robin Soderling in the French Open final. It was the Swiss star's first Roland Garros title and helped him become only the sixth man to complete a career Grand Slam. Fererer won 6/1,7/6,6/4. AFP PHOTO / LIONEL BONAVENTURE (Photo credit should read LIONEL BONAVENTURE/AFP/Getty Images)

AFP/Getty Images

Swedish player Robin Soderling returns a ball to Swiss player Roger Federer during their French Open tennis men's final match on June 7, 2009 at Roland Garros Stadium in Paris. Roger Federer won his 14th major on June 7, 2009 with victory over Robin Soderling in the French Open final. It was the Swiss star's first Roland Garros title and helped him become only the sixth man to complete a career Grand Slam. Fererer won 6/1,7/6,6/4. AFP PHOTO / LIONEL BONAVENTURE (Photo credit should read LIONEL BONAVENTURE/AFP/Getty Images)

AFP/Getty Images

Spectators perform a Mexican Wave during the French Open tennis men's final match between Swiss Roger Federer and Swedish player Robin Soderling on June 7, 2009 at Roland Garros Stadium in Paris. The event, the second Grand Slam tournament of 2009, runs from May 25 to June 7, 2009. Fererer won 6/1,7/6,6/4. AFP PHOTO / JACQUES DEMARTHON (Photo credit should read JACQUES DEMARTHON/AFP/Getty Images)

AFP/Getty Images

PARIS - JUNE 07: Roger Federer of Switzerland hits a forehand during the Men's Singles Final match against Robin Soderling of Sweden on day fifteen of the French Open at Roland Garros on June 7, 2009 in Paris, France. (Photo by Matthew Stockman/Getty Images) *** Local Caption *** Roger Federer

Getty Images

PARIS - JUNE 07: Robin Soderling of Sweden servesduring the Men's Singles Final match against Roger Federer of Switzerland on day fifteen of the French Open at Roland Garros on June 7, 2009 in Paris, France. (Photo by Matthew Stockman/Getty Images) *** Local Caption *** Robin Soderling

Getty Images

PARIS - JUNE 07: Robin Soderling of Sweden reacts during the Men's Singles Final match against Roger Federer of Switzerland on day fifteen of the French Open at Roland Garros on June 7, 2009 in Paris, France. (Photo by Matthew Stockman/Getty Images) *** Local Caption *** Robin Soderling

Getty Images

PARIS - JUNE 07: Roger Federer of Switzerland serves during the Men's Singles Final match against Robin Soderling of Sweden on day fifteen of the French Open at Roland Garros on June 7, 2009 in Paris, France. (Photo by Matthew Stockman/Getty Images) *** Local Caption *** Roger Federer

Getty Images

PARIS - JUNE 07: Former Tennis player Bjorn Borg watches Roger Federer of Switzerland in action during the Men's Singles Final match against Robin Soderling of Sweden on day fifteen of the French Open at Roland Garros on June 7, 2009 in Paris, France. (Photo by Ryan Pierse/Getty Images) *** Local Caption *** Bjorn Borg;Roger Federer

Getty Images

"It's, I guess, the most satisfying victory in my life, next to my first Wimbledon,'' he said. "For so many years, I've been trying so hard to get this title.''

It looked hopeless after last year, when Nadal beat him in the final 6-1, 6-3. 6-0. A few weeks later, Nadal beat Federer in the classic Wimbledon final -- GMOAT? Greatest Match Of All Time? -- and then Federer won the U.S. Open, but Nadal hadn't gotten to the finals.

And when Nadal beat Federer in the Australian final this year, Federer broke into tears. Since then, we've seen him fall apart against the best players, lose his backhand and his head. He was in denial. He wouldn't get a coach, wouldn't change his style, wouldn't get aggressive. He seemed to think his brilliance was enough.

But finally something clicked, and he did change. He did start to go for more on his serve, did get aggressive, did mix things up with dropshots. He put himself through marathon practice sessions, simulating a five-set French Open final. He spent time working on sliding on the clay. It was a champion trying to conquer his last hurdles. The French Open, yes. But moreso: Nadal.

One down, one to go.

The confidence started to show through in May, when he Nadal in Madrid, not a major, but on red clay. Nadal, though, had played a marathon match the day before.

So this week was huge for Federer even after Nadal lost. Lose without Nadal there, and what would that say about the GOAT? He had beaten Soderling nine times in a row. So each match felt like a final to him, and the pressure built. And what happened in the real final?

He was light on his feet. His serve: Great. His footwork: Great. His toughness: Great.

"You really gave me a lesson of how to play tennis today,'' Soderling said to Federer over the public address system. "To me, you're the greatest in history, so you really deserved to win this title.

"Yesterday, me and my coach were joking: Nobody can beat me 10 times in a row.''

Maybe Federer can do anything to anyone again. He can do anything and beat anyone again.

The GOAT needs just one more thing.

Reader Comments (Page 1 of 3)

6-07-2009 @ 2:06PM

karl said...

Agassi & Federer are the only two men's players to win the Grand Slam on 4 different surfaces as 3 of the 4 tournaments used to be played on grass back when the other four GS winners accomplished their feat. Andre has already endorsed Roger as GREATEST OF ALL TIME as has Sampras & Johhny Mac. NOBODY in the history of the game has played as well on all 4 surfaces...NOBODY! Perhaps Borg was a better clay court player and Pete a grass court player, etc, but there is a consistant GREATNESS from Roger in every venue. Roger is an incredible clay court player, probably in the TOP 10 all time but Nadal happens to be a bit better, however,Rafa is not in Fed's league on the hardcourts and Roger is still better on grass IMO. What is overlooked more than any other asset of his, is Roger's quickness & fluidity on all 4 surfaces, again NOBODY else can make that claim. It is fun to ponder who is the G.O.A.T. in any sport, but if you look at it objectively and in the context of all 4 surfaces, Roger is clearly the best men's tennis player that ever gripped a racket.....regardless of the rude and obnoxious Bud Collins may think. I'd say Roger's contemporaries know better than he.

6-07-2009 @ 3:55PM

Lonelypoet said...

Karl,

You said it best! I cannot add to what you wrote! Therefore, let me say, Roger Federer is the greatest men's tennis player to ever grace a tennis court, "PERIOD!" All you nay-sayers are just in denial, and are jealous!

ROGER FEDERER is the Tiger Woods of tennis. There is everyone else, and then there is Roger Federer!

6-07-2009 @ 3:09PM

jzz3skys said...

El Coucho has shifted into legacy mode and is now reciting the past 20 years of men's tennis, however, his recent coverage of women's tennis (his approach to which can be summed up in the following way: Insult the Loser and Throw Around Some Stereotypes) has left a bitter aftertaste that ain't going away.

Let me put it this way. If objectivity is a bedrock value of the Fourth Estate, then El Coucho is living in the outhouse behind the estate (and he may be a Flintstone besides).

Let me explain. Most of the writers whose pictures you see in the left-hand column were hired under the previous AOL sports director Derrick Heggans, who has since moved on the become Dean of the Emory University School of Nursing. His position was filled by former New York Times Book Review editor Scott Ridge, who hired El Coucho on the recommendation of fellow Sun-Times alum Jay Mariotti. You've read about the massive layoffs at that newspaper.

El Coucho threw his fate to the find, but it's an ill wind that's blowin' me no good.

So Greggie boy, what's it feel like being a Mariotti hireling? What do you have to do, send him a jar of liquor-soaked Italian cherries every Christmas?

Scott Ridge, why not get somebody else to cover women's tennis?

6-07-2009 @ 3:51PM

krd said...

if there is such player (goat) it's federer. twenty straight semis in the majors, 14 majors, three or four year-ending masters 15 of 16 slam finals, and nadal has the edge only because most of their matches have been on clay. give federer credit for not dodging the clay court season like sampras and mcenroe. if federer dodged nadal on clay the way mcenroe dodged borg he would have a winning record against him. moreover, the courts are much slower at wimbledon and the australian then they were when borg and sampras played. that has definitely taken away from his game and helped the players who really can't volley. players don't have to know how to volley anymore.

as for borg, he was unusually strong and the depth during his playing days may have been the best during any time. there were many specialist in terms of surface as well as a number of all court players. look at lendl, connors, pannata, gerulitis, ramirez just to name the short list of the all-court players, not to mention the specialist on clay such as dibbs, solomon, vilas, clerc, higueras, orantes,and pecci. then there were the fast-courters like tanner, amaya, edmondson, armatrjay, and mcenroe who may fit into more than one category. i've left people out no doubt. it would have been interesting to see how nadal would have matched up against clay-courters that made it wars of atrition...you know borg, vilas and lendl.

anyway, the 20 in a row semis in the majors was never done in any era... no one has come remotely close.

6-07-2009 @ 4:01PM

stewdes said...

I do not like the "new" grass that they use at Wimbledon. It plays more like clay than it used to. Last year, I knew Roger was in trouble when he was 10 feet behind the baseline swinging at balls that were above his shoulder. On the old grass at Wimbledon, a ball would never be that high so far back.

Great job, Roger!

6-07-2009 @ 4:08PM

ashleigh said...

You keep insisting on harping on the rivalry instead of going on cold hard #'s... The supposed rivalry just doesn't matter -- the #'s matter and that's all! Winning tournaments is what matters, not who you beat... Today he beat the guy who beat Rafa, but no-one will care... You keep harping on the "rivalry" -- that's just media talking... Truth is, Roger has a winning record, period. Does he ever lose? Yes, but what are his numbers? 40 consecutive Grand Slams, 15 of the 1ast 16 consecutive GS Finals, 20 consecutive GS Semi-Finals -- NO-ONE even comes close to that!! He was #1 for nearly half a decade, nearly 5 years, consecutively -- NO-ONE has come close to that! And Rafa, mere months into his #1 ranking, and he's already got big problems... Out at the French, out of Queens, maybe out of Wimbledon... Maybe this is mental, but it's also physical... What about the "pressure" Djokevic felt with the 1 Slam he won? (Which he only won because Roger had mono... Same reason RF got spanked at last year's French, & why he lost at Wimbie...) -- but your inane commentary that Roger not beating his closest rival enough to make his GOAT a solid thing is totally absurd! He has no real rivals, and Rafa is his closest rival, pretty much the only person he loses to at all, outside of the random few losses to Djoker & Murray & Roddick... No-one can win everything all the time, and no-one can be #1 forever... And Sampras, who was considered the best, never even made it to the French Open Finals ever, let alone 4 consecutive years like Roger... 6 consecutive Finals (5 consecutive wins) at Wimbie, 5 consecutive wins at the US Open, 4 consecutive Finals (1 win) at the French Open, and 3 wins at the Aussie Open - His record is unmatched by anyone!! So who cares if Rafa has won a few more matches over him? Really! Who the heck cares? Roger has more records than anyone!! So Greg, stop already with this BS about the rivalry, as though that matters more than records and numbers -- of which Roger reigns supreme...

6-07-2009 @ 4:22PM

Hello Dave said...

It seems no one has ever heard of Jimmy Connors, who won on all 4 surfaces, and is the ONLY player ever to win the US open on all 4 surfaces, yes he won 4 opens on 4 surfaces. I would take Connors or Borg in their prime against anyone, they both had more heart than any player in today's game

6-07-2009 @ 5:50PM

amcled1 said...

"You can't compare your contemporaries". That was the answer a very great Chess Grandmaster told me when I was just a beginner learning the game many years ago. Many say Bobby Fischer was the greatest chess player of all time (I think so for example-but, I could be wrong of course), but others will have a different opinion.

Many say Sugar Ray Robinson was the greatest boxer pound for pound of all time (I think so also-but I could be wrong of course). The same goes for Rocky Marciano who was the only undefeated heavyweight champion in all history. Many will say he was the greatest (I think so-but I could be wrong of course). Marciano, like Rod Laver was a "small man" compared to today’s heavyweights (although laver's forearm was as big as Marciano's and bigger than many heavyweights even today-the size of a big man's thigh).

While I respect Mr. Couch's article, it would have been a bit more accurate had he stated that Rod Laver is the only tennis player to have won all four Grand Slam singles titles twice in the same year — first as an amateur in 1962 and second as a professional in 1969, instead of stating "Rod Laver won two Grand Slams, meaning he won all four in the same year twice." But then again, I realize Mr. Couch is big on Roger Federer-which is ok too.

The "Greatest Ever" is purely subjective and when one realizes that in boxing, tennis, and many other sports that the conditions of the equipment, ring, track, etc-and size of the competitors have changed as well they should as we march forward in time. It is only natural.

Example: Carl Lewis broke several of The great Jesse Owen's records. Does that mean that Carl Lewis is the best track star of all time? I think there are a lot of people out there that believe if the tack conditions that Owens had back when he won his Gold Medals and possibly some other variables and intangibles combined, that Carl Lewis certainly was "better" than Jesse Owens.

Bottom line-You can't compare with the contemporaries of today and that of yesteryear-But, it is sure fun to do!!

6-07-2009 @ 6:19PM

Hello Dave,

Jimbo was indeed a great warrior but you are incorrect about him winning all Four Majors on the 4 different surfaces ; he never won the French Open.

6-07-2009 @ 6:45PM

beesee said...

Is it just me, or is it my imagination that McEnroe has a mancrush on Roger Federer? When Roger makes any kind of error, McEnroe grunts as if he feels his pain....

6-07-2009 @ 11:31PM

Maybe but he did win the US Open on all 4 surfaces, and he had more HEART then any of the current players combined

6-07-2009 @ 7:22PM

aceguiller said...

I think the GOAT doesn't need that "one more thing". It's because maybe Nadal is not a rival of Federer because Nadal was not able to be in every major final that Federer was in.

6-07-2009 @ 7:16PM

cjgdnight said...

Way to go Roger!!!!

AND

Having read some recent articles, why is Greg the assclown still allowed to write????

6-07-2009 @ 7:23PM

Mark said...

I agree with much of your article but also feel like you're making excuses for Nadal. For example, you say that Federer beat him on clay but Nadal had played a marathon match the day before. So what? That's what being an athlete is all about. If you measure everything by if everyone is equally fit, then that's a sorry argument.

If Nadal loses to Federer, he loses to Federer; no excuses. If Nadal can't finish someone off without having a marathon match, well, maybe something is wrong.

veronique1117 said...

roger federer is the greatest men ever so far and i hope he still and more many grand slams to come besides that he is one the most beautiful person you will ever meet or you will meet . very polite very pacifist humble gentleman besides his graceful play he is brimmed with values he is a great person a kid in heart i wish luck health and happiness in everything he does i truly like this person a lot

6-07-2009 @ 7:25PM

SuperKyle said...

Federer is awesome. But the best ever? I say no. Excepting Nadal, who's his competition? Sampras had Agassi, Federer, Becker, Guga, and so many others who are considered among the greats in their own right. Winning so many against mediocre opponents and consistently falling to one individual screams volumes. Would I want to play him...nope. But is he the greatest? Today...Nah. Maybe if the field opens up.

6-07-2009 @ 8:06PM

An interesting comparison for sure, but Sampras, McEnroe, Agassi and Lendl's opinions are probably more accurate than the weekend fan and they all say that Federer is without a doubt the greatest tennis player of all time....that endorsement says alot!!!

6-07-2009 @ 7:28PM

serenitylal said...

I think that's nonsense that this French doesn't mean anything because Federer didn't play Nadal.It's not Federer's fault that nadal was eliminated by Soderling.You play the cards your'e dealt!!!!!

6-07-2009 @ 7:59PM

gerripeter said...

CONGRATULATIONS TO ROGER. I think you are a great tennis player and a true gentleman. It is a pleasure to watch you on the court. I am so pleased you won your 14th major today and hope you will win #15 at Winbledon. Good Luck to you
Roger and to your proud family!

6-07-2009 @ 8:11PM

geoff2u said...

Roger is GOAT du-jour, GOAT of the moment. The Wimbledon final will be a battle no one will forget. Then who's the GOAT du-jour?

I think Johnny Mac is dumfounded by Roger's demeanor, able to dominate the sport and be a gentleman.