I have never seen such pain in an athlete's eyes. Did you see Andy Roddick's eyes, wide open, and something deep pleading to come out?"No," he said to the crowd afterward, "I'm one of the lucky few that gets cheered for."
And he thanked the fans.
Yes, Roger Federer had just won Wimbledon. He beat Roddick 5-7, 7-6 (8-6), 7-6 (7-5), 3-6, 16-14 Sunday for his record-breaking 15th major title.
That's right, the last set was 16-14, or 10 games longer than any previous fifth set in a major. Turns out that while this wasn't quite the drama or quality of last year's final, Rafael Nadal didn't have to be here for a classic Wimbledon. Instead, Pete Sampras, who had won 14 majors, was there. And Rod Laver and Bjorn Borg. History came together to watch history being made.
"It was a crazy match with an unbelievable end," Federer said. "My head is still spinning."
But he also said this: "Definitely it doesn't feel as great, maybe, as winning in straight sets where people feel better for you. This is a tough moment for Andy."
Despite all those greats there, and Federer's new record, and the usual ghosts on Centre Court, Roddick stole the moment. He stole the crowd, too, even though he was the one who had dumped their hero, the Great Brit Hope Andy Murray, in the semis. We knew Federer would break the record eventually. What we didn't know until these past two weeks was that Roddick had this in him. Greatness. Humility. Class. Maturity. A backhand. A brain.
"I just want to say congratulations to Roger," Roddick said to the crowd. "He's a true champion and he deserves everything he gets. Well done, Roger."
Then he looked to Sampras, who had just watched his record broken, in the crowd: "Sorry, Pete. I tried to hold him off.
"It was a pleasure playing here today in front of great champions ..."His voice cracked and wavered, as he listed those greats, and he said he still hopes to have his name up there, among them, someday.
It feels a little weird talking about Roddick here. After all, the day will be remembered for what Federer did. John McEnroe, doing the NBC telecast, asked Sampras whether there is any doubt now that Federer is the best ever. Sampras discounted himself and mentioned that Laver had won two Grand Slams, all four majors in one calendar year.
I'll stick with this: Federer is the best of all time, for now. But his story isn't finished. In the past year, Nadal, who didn't defend his Wimbledon title because he has tendonitis in his knees, has owned Federer. If that keeps up, then no, you can't say Federer is the best ever when he can't even beat the rival of his own time. But if Federer, who now climbs to the No. 1 ranking, starts beating Nadal, then he actually will go down not only as the best tennis player ever, but also one of the most dominant athletes of all time.
On Sunday, Federer just looked like the golden boy out there, floating around the court as a legend. Roddick was fighting a human battle, scrapping and struggling, seeming lower to the ground somehow. Still, in the past 12 months, Federer lost that classic Wimbledon final to Nadal and then lost his mojo for a while. In one tournament, he smashed his racquet on the court.
When he won the French, finally winning a major on clay, his confidence came rushing back. So good for him. He is so smooth out there that I think he could do an intentional belly flop into a pool and still not make a splash. He wore that sweat jacket with the gold piping, and the No. 15 already prepared on the back.
And they already had a TV commercial ready for after the moment, showing his friend Tiger Woods, and Sampras, McEnroe and other greats congratulating him. McEnroe cried and said "That's double what I got."
Meanwhile, Roddick, in real life, was sitting on his chair staring at the ground, with his racquet lying by his foot. Roddick not only served great, as always, but also mixed things up, came to the net, never panicked, played defensively when he needed to. People are portraying this as his resurgence, but that's wrong. He was never at this point, not even when he won one U.S. Open, or lost to Federer twice before in Wimbledon finals.
That guy came in at the tail end of the power era, and was all big serve, hustling attitude and cocky personality. As the face of American tennis, he was an embarrassing cliché, someone who could muscle up, but nothing else.
Last year, he lost in the second round to Yanko Tipsarevic and started thinking he wasn't meant to win another major. He left London immediately to get away from Wimbledon, but nearly two weeks later found himself trapped in an airport, and guess what was on the TV there. The Federer-Nadal final.
From there, he had deep talks with his now-wife, Brooklyn Decker, about his future. He hired a new coach, Larry Stefanki, lost 15 pounds, found some foot speed and, basically, found more dimensions for his game.
In the past, Roddick fell apart in fifth sets. It's an inner-moment in a tennis match, and he had nothing to turn to. On Sunday, he smacked backhand winners down the line. For much of the match, he was pushing Federer around.
Latest Tennis Images
Anna-Lena Groenfeld of Germany partners Mark Knowles of the Bahamas against Leander Paes of India and Cara Black of Zimbabwe in the Mixed Doubles Finals at the Wimbledon Tennis Championships at the All England Tennis Club, in southwest London, on July 5, 2009. AFP PHOTO/ADRIAN DENNIS (Photo credit should read ADRIAN DENNIS/AFP/Getty Images)
AFP/Getty Images
Anna-Lena Groenfeld of Germany partners Mark Knowles of the Bahamas against Leander Paes of India and Cara Black of Zimbabwe in the Mixed Doubles Finals at the Wimbledon Tennis Championships at the All England Tennis Club, in southwest London, on July 5, 2009. AFP PHOTO/ADRIAN DENNIS (Photo credit should read ADRIAN DENNIS/AFP/Getty Images)
AFP/Getty Images
Germany's Anna-Lena Groenefeld (R) and Bahama's Mark Knowles hold the trophies after beating after India's Leander Paes and Zimbabwe's Cara Black during the mixed doubles final match on Day 13 at the 2009 Wimbledon tennis championships at the All England Club on July 5, 2009. The event, the third Grand Slam tournament of 2009, runs from June 22 to July 5, 2009. Groenefeld and Knowles won 7/5,6/3. AFP PHOTO / ADRIAN DENNIS (Photo credit should read ADRIAN DENNIS/AFP/Getty Images)
AFP/Getty Images
India's Leander Paes (L) and Zimbabwe's Cara Black hold the runner's up trophy after losing against Germany's Anna-Lena Groenefeld and Bahama's Mark Knowles during the mixed doubles final match on Day 13 at the 2009 Wimbledon tennis championships at the All England Club on July 5, 2009. The event, the third Grand Slam tournament of 2009, runs from June 22 to July 5, 2009. Groenefeld and Knowles won 7/5,6/3. AFP PHOTO / ADRIAN DENNIS (Photo credit should read ADRIAN DENNIS/AFP/Getty Images)
AFP/Getty Images
Leander Paes of India partners Cara Black of Zimbabwe against Mark Knowles of the Bahamas and Anna-Lena Groenfeld of Germany in the Mixed Doubles Finals at the Wimbledon Tennis Championships at the All England Tennis Club, in southwest London, on July 5, 2009. AFP PHOTO/ADRIAN DENNIS (Photo credit should read ADRIAN DENNIS/AFP/Getty Images)
AFP/Getty Images
India's Leander Paes (L) and Zimbabwe's Cara Black hold the runner's up trophy after losing against Germany's Anna-Lena Groenefeld and Bahama's Mark Knowles during the mixed doubles final match on Day 13 at the 2009 Wimbledon tennis championships at the All England Club on July 5, 2009. The event, the third Grand Slam tournament of 2009, runs from June 22 to July 5, 2009. Groenefeld and Knowles won 7/5,6/3. AFP PHOTO / ADRIAN DENNIS (Photo credit should read ADRIAN DENNIS/AFP/Getty Images)
AFP/Getty Images
Leander Paes of India partners Cara Black of Zimbabwe against Mark Knowles of the Bahamas and Anna-Lena Groenfeld of Germany in the Mixed Doubles Finals at the Wimbledon Tennis Championships at the All England Tennis Club, in southwest London, on July 5, 2009. AFP PHOTO/ADRIAN DENNIS (Photo credit should read ADRIAN DENNIS/AFP/Getty Images)
AFP/Getty Images
Germany's Anna-Lena Groenefeld (R) and Bahama's Mark Knowles (C) receive the trophy after beating India's Leander Paes and Zimbabwe's Cara Black during the mixed doubles final match on Day 13 at the 2009 Wimbledon tennis championships at the All England Club on July 5, 2009. The event, the third Grand Slam tournament of 2009, runs from June 22 to July 5, 2009. Groenefeld and Knowles won 7/5,6/3. AFP PHOTO / ADRIAN DENNIS (Photo credit should read ADRIAN DENNIS/AFP/Getty Images)
AFP/Getty Images
Germany's Anna-Lena Groenefeld (R) and Bahama's Mark Knowles hold the trophy after beating India's Leander Paes and Zimbabwe's Cara Black during the mixed doubles final match on Day 13 at the 2009 Wimbledon tennis championships at the All England Club on July 5, 2009. The event, the third Grand Slam tournament of 2009, runs from June 22 to July 5, 2009. Groenefeld and Knowles won 7/5,6/3. AFP PHOTO / ADRIAN DENNIS (Photo credit should read ADRIAN DENNIS/AFP/Getty Images)
AFP/Getty Images
Mark Knowles (R) of the Bahamas celebrates after partnering Anna-Lena Groenfeld (L) of Germany to victory in the Mixed Doubles Finals against Leander Paes of India and Cara Black of Zimbabwe at the Wimbledon Tennis Championships at the All England Tennis Club, in southwest London, on July 5, 2009. AFP PHOTO/ADRIAN DENNIS (Photo credit should read ADRIAN DENNIS/AFP/Getty Images)
AFP/Getty Images
If it weren't for his meltdown at the French, we could proclaim him a newly matured, 26-year old married man. Maybe he's going to pull an Andre Agassi on us and become something to look up to rather than some loud punk.
He seemed relaxed throughout the tournament, even having a running joking-feud with Brooklyn on their Twitter accounts, as they divulged embarrassing things about each other. Roddick is a fan of singer Rick Astley.
"You know," Roddick said, "Brook has been a very calming influence, and someone that I can kind of confide in and not have to put up, you know, a super brave front in front of."
Roddick had a chance to win. Up a set, and 6-2 in the second set tiebreaker, he had four set points for nearly unbeatable momentum. Federer won six straight, with Roddick missing one easy backhand volley that will haunt him for a long time.
Roddick had his last chance at 8-all, up 15-40 on Federer's serve. But he couldn't break. When Federer won the final game, if was the first break of Roddick's serve all day.
So Roddick gives America a men's tennis star again, one much more likable. But his name still isn't with the legends who watched him from courtside, or from the other side of the net. No, the golden boy floated down and stole the tournament and history.
Like what you read here? Follow me on Twitter: @gregcouch
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 2)
7-05-2009 @ 7:48PM
Bob said...
A great example of how two athletes can both win in the same event, and win well, with dignity and class. Congratulations to Roddick for a gutty, determined, well-rounded match, and to Federer for the record-breaker. Hopefully this is a sign of things to come for Andy, just as Agassi had his "rebirth". As for Roger, until he can beat Nadal regularly, I'm still not calling him the best ever--but he is absolutely in the rarest of air with few others.
Reply
7-05-2009 @ 7:57PM
hotrodwrm said...
Regardless of how many majors Federer wins, I will always doubt that the level of competition was as great as what Pete had to go through to get his majors. Pete had to fight his way through a host of other contemporary Hall of Fame bound competitors, while Federer's contemporary Hall of Fame bound competitor has owned him. Federer's competition has been spotty, with only Nadal stepping up and becoming a fixture in the top ranks. To me, Federer is the Mike Tyson of tennis champions: he came at a time when competition was weak and he feasted on it. It's not the number of majors that Pete won that makes him, in my mind, the greatest ever, but the players he had to beat in order to win them that elevates him to the best.
Reply
7-05-2009 @ 8:15PM
cjgdnight said...
I think Roger and Pete were both great, great players and more importantly great champions.
Would offer two ideas.. one is that as the money goes up in a sport, the better athletes gravitate toward that sport... tennis is no exception. lots of athletes today.
The second idea is that the world talent is not as American centric as it was with Agassi and Pete, so we may have a tendancy to downplay the current foreign talent.. (again... MAY).
Don't think you can lose picking between Pete and Roger as the greatest ever. Splitting hairs.
7-05-2009 @ 8:51PM
karl said...
hotrod, Can you show some proof of your statement that guys like Murray, Roddick, Nalbanean, Djokovic, Safin, Ancic, Soderling, Haas, Ferrer, Fernando Verdasco, Gael Monfils, James Blake,Lleyton Hewitt, Nikolay Davydenko, Fernando Verdasco, Juan Martin Del Potro are not in the same class with the players you mentioned. Some of the aforementioned players are specific court specialists,(Monfils/Clay) which Sampras did not deal with as much during his reign. It will always hard to compare greats from different decades, centuries and eras but what makes me think and state that Roger is G.O.A.T. is the that very endorsement from players like Johnny Mac, Sampras, Lendl, Agassi, etc. Those players know tennis and guys like Agassi played Roger, Rafa, and Sampras and all of the guys you mentioned in your post and Agassi stated that Roger is the best of all time!! NO OTHER male tennis player has been as outstanding on 4 unique surfaces as Federer. Every opinion counts, but your statement lacks objective evidence IMO and is contrary to the opinion of the greats themselves.
7-05-2009 @ 9:27PM
icycoolvar said...
Actually, Sampras falls far behind Federer in the better tennis player discussion. Its not true that Sampras played better competition, cjgdnight explains why... but for the sake of argument lets pretend it was. Sampras was absolutely worthless on clay courts. Even if Federer had not won the FO, he would still be the second best clay courter in the world, at worst, while one would be hard-pressed to call Sampras a good clay-court tennis player...
7-05-2009 @ 8:10PM
karl said...
Take nadal's native surface away (clay) and Roger has a 5-4 lifetime edge over Rafa and they're 2-2 in Slams. Is it not unfair for you to penalize Fed for making all the four surface Finals EVERY YEAR and reward Rafa for not making them, particularly the Hardcourts? Doesn't that truth alone tell you something about who is an all around better tennis player? Additionally do you realize that Federer is Rafa's senior by 5 years? That might not be alot to compare you and I for instance, but to professional tennis players/athletes that is an eternity.Agassi and Samprass, Johnny Mac & Borg were close in age. Lastly, Richard Krajicek, Lleyton Hewitt, and Marat Safin, have a winning record vs. Sampras; does that indicate they were better players than Pete? Of course not. "Styles make fights" and just see Ali vs Kenny Norton when it comes to that point! Rafa will NEVER accomplish what Federer has on all 4 surface courts and that is why Roger gets the nod for me......
Reply
7-05-2009 @ 9:07PM
ashleigh said...
Some of these comments are so ignorant... Roger has a whole host of competitors, just as Pete Sampras had... Ever heard of Djokovic or Murray or Haas or Gonzo or Davydenko, or Roddick, Nadal, etc... There are a ton of great, tough competitors on tour and it's an insult not only to all of them, but to Roger, too... He doesn't have just Nadal or just Murray as competition...
He competes against whoever is across the net from him... And his record speaks for itself (40 Grand Slams, 21 GS Semi's, 20 GS Finals, of which 16 of the past 17 have been consecutive, 7 consecutive Wimbie Finals, of which he's won 6, 5 of them consecutively, 5 consecutive US Opens, only the 3rd man in 40 years to win the French Open & Wimbledon in the same year, a Career Slam, and now 15 Grand Slam Championship Titles, more than any other man...
But all the posts can talk about is that he hasn't beaten Nadal enough? You've got to be kidding! He's lost only ONE grass match to Nadal, he's lost only ONE hard court match to Nadal, and all the other losses to Nadal have been on clay, Nadal's main surface... Big deal... So what?! He beats most people across the net from him, and THAT is what matters... And he has EVERYONE in a rivalry with him, not just Nadal or Murray... You guys act like Pete had SO many rivals as compared to Federer's one or two, but truly that isn't correct at all... When you're #1 for nearly 5 consecutive years, EVERYONE is your rival... The amazingly tough level of competition he has to face day in and day out is every bit as challenging as what Pistol Pete experienced...
Reply
7-05-2009 @ 9:12PM
ashleigh said...
Karl -- I love the points you made! Thank you! It's good to see that someone else gets RF's greatness without having to drone on about it not being the same as Pete's, or other's levels of competition, or droning on about Nadal being his only rival, which is pure rubbish! Great to see someone with intelligence who truly gets it about Roger's greatness!!! Way to go Karl...
Reply
7-05-2009 @ 9:57PM
marcveleznj said...
MR. COUCH, WHY DO YOU HAVE THE URGE TO BRING UP RAFAEL NADAL IN EVERY ARTICLE YOU WRITE ABOUT TENNIS? CAN'T YOU GET IT, THE DUDE PUNKED OUT SAYING HIS KNEES HURT, BOOO THE FREAKING HOOOO. YOU KEEP SAYING THAT HE'S BEATING FEDERER, BUT IS NOT A ONE SIDED RIVELRY DUDE, CHECK THE STATS FEDERER HAS BEATEN NADAL AS RECENT AS LAST MONTH. THE PROOF IS IN THE PUDDING, IF NADAL CAN'T SUCK IT UP TO PLAY AT WIMBLEDON, THEN HE DOES NOT DESERVE TO BE IN THE SAME SENTENCE AS ROGER FEDERER, WHOM BTW PLAYED AN ENTIRE YEAR WITH MONO AND MADE EVERY SLAM FINAL AND WON THE US OPEN. WHEN NADAL CAN SHOW UP WEEK AFTER WEEK AND DELIVER, THEN YOU CAN GUSH ALL YOU WANT ABOUT HIM TILL THE COWS COME HOME! UNTIL THEN, FACE IT YOUR GOLDEN MUCHACHO PROBABLY WON'T BE AROUND MUCH LONGER, IF AT HIS AGE HE'S COMPLAINING ABOUT HIS BODY GIVING OUT, WHAT IS IT GOING TO BE LIKE WHEN HE'S ROGER'S AGE? WHEELCHAIR TENNIS FOR RAFA'S FUTURE?
Reply
7-06-2009 @ 3:07AM
ashleigh said...
MarcVeleznj --- I TOTALLY agree with all that you wrote!!!!! Right on!!! Greg Couch is an ignorant ass who is anti-Roger & pro-Nadal to the point of stupidity... Nadal is #1 for a mere 10 months & goes fake-crippled -- he played fine against Hewitt in that pre-Wimbie match, but because he lost, he bails on Wimbie, which is more about his ego than it is an injury... & Roger plays MANY tough opponants, not just Nadal... So what you wrote was spot on!
7-05-2009 @ 10:40PM
div5lex said...
Roger is a great player...however he needs to start dominating his chief rival if he wants the GOAT honor. And yes I am a Roger fan!
Reply
7-05-2009 @ 11:02PM
karl said...
Listen to what other tennis GREATS from two distinct eras. June 2009
The American’s sentiment was also shared by Sweden’s Mats Wilander.
"The one thing that there is no doubt about is that Federer is head and shoulders above everyone who has picked up a tennis racket when it comes to talent".
“Roger’s got too many shots, too much talent in one body,” Australian great Laver, observed.
“It’s hardly fair that one person can do all this — his backhands, his forehands, volleys, serving, his court position … the way he moves around the court, you feel like he’s barely touching the ground, and that’s the sign of a great champion.”
7-06-2009 @ 2:42AM
Bob said...
Karl, you bring up one who could arguably be put on the same pedestal that most have Federer on, that being Rod Laver. Laver is being truly gracious and humble in his remarks, knowing how he OWNED the competition of his era. The only thing that kept Rod from holding all the records was that the tennis hierarchy couldn't decide which to promote, amateur or professional players. Laver lost many YEARS in his prime, before and after which he dominated like no one else has. He confounded the competition with his incredible shotmaking ability, putting the ball in spots where no earthly being could possibly reach it in time. Is he the best ever? No one can honestly say, just as they can't definitively say that about Federer. One thing is for certain--the two of them are two of the best that ever played the game, and that should be enough for anybody.
Reply
7-06-2009 @ 3:17AM
jzz3skys said...
Social psychologist Stanley Milgram conducted famous obedience experiments after WWII and he found that most subjects were willing to administer torture in the form of electric shocks to other human beings when told to do so by an authority figure, even when it conflicted with their conscience.
This blog is a study in conformism. Everyone knows that historians will always disagree as to who the best (and worst) presidents in the history of the country were and that musicologists will all concede that there are no objective standards by which to judge the greatest composer in the history of Western music, and yet we're being told to accept that there is a greatest tennis player of all time.
Reply
7-06-2009 @ 7:35AM
obamaizamarxist said...
He was just toying with Roddick, like a Porsche 911 toys with a Mustang GT. Roger's stamina was very impressive.
Reply
7-06-2009 @ 11:32AM
Egypt Tours said...
Fedrrer is a good player but NADAl is my favorite
Reply
7-06-2009 @ 5:48PM
Jokatech said...
I have never been angrier with Skip and Jamele on Sportscenter. They have the nerve to say that Federer isn't the best by far because of the lack of competition today! Now, I wanted Andy to get his chance, but come the heck on!! This is the problem with idiots who immortalize players just for existing a long time ago! There are a plethora of insanely good players today - Djokovic, Nadal, Roddick, Tsonga, Murray, etc. But because they don't yet have 30 year old legacies, they are irrelevant. That is the stupidest thinking I have ever heard!
Reply
7-06-2009 @ 1:26PM
coyoteb1 said...
Such a pity that only one person could win -- BOTH deserved it. One terrific match -- thanks to both Andy and Roger for a thrilling Sunday
Reply
7-06-2009 @ 4:14PM
Yohncc said...
This was a good article except for the reference that Andy Roddick is and Andre Agassi was a punk. Andy Roddick may be a lot of things, however a "punk" is not one of them. As for andre agassi being a punk, Greg, he could get more women than you ever could in your dreams.
Reply
7-06-2009 @ 4:16PM
Yohncc said...
Correction: Andre Agassi
Reply