Is Roger Federer nearing the end? It would certainly seem so. After crashing to yet another embarassing defeat against a player he would have crushed just eighteen months ago in a major, this time being Tommy Robredo, calls for Federer to retire are becoming more and more common. He has reinvented himself in the past, but perhaps he is broken beyond repair this time.
It is a shame that tennis is looking like it will lose its greatest ever player, but perhaps it is not over yet. Perhaps we just need to lower our expectations of him and hope that he can conjure up a few moments of pure magic in earlier rounds and win some still prestigious, but not Grand Slam, tournaments.
Something which to me documents his diminishing in recent months is to watch his 2008 US Open Final against a young Andy Murray. After a difficult season, in which he lost two major finals and had many of his winning streaks in various competitions ended, he played some of the best tennis ever witnessed at Flushing Meadows to destroy Murray in straight sets.
What sets great players from the rest in mens’ tennis is the ability to get great power out of shots with little effort. If you look at the current top three players (although none of them will ever have the style and grace that Roger has, instead they play tennis at its efficient best), they all have much smaller backswings than any other players (which was evident when Federer played Robredo). In that final it looked like Federer was playing with an elastic racquet, the way he returned that ball at mesmerising pace with a mere flick of the wrist. Murray meanwhile, looked like he was playing with an ordinary racquet. I haven’t quite justified the difference between the two, so I would strongly recommend watching the highlights of that final so that you can understand my point better.
Now, although Murray’s playing style is comparatively ugly, it seems that he is the one playing with the elastic, whilst Federer now plays with a racquet which us other mere mortals would hold. That seems to be the main reason that Federer can no longer challenge for Grand Slam titles; it seems to take more effort for him to get the same power he used to get.
Even though Federer has had the most difficult season in his career, should he retire he will always be remembered as the greatest player to grace a tennis court.
However, it’s not all over yet. I pointed out in an earlier article that Womens’ tennis is a young girl’s game. Obviously, in the mens’ game you can’t carry on playing at the top level until you’re sixty-five, but the game isn’t as ruthless towards men in their thirties as it is to women of that age. In fact, many other sports are like that. Becky Adlington had to retire from swimming aged twenty-three, whereas some men just start to reach the top at that age (it’s the same in the disabled version of the sport as well). Successful female golfers are getting younger and younger, whereas Tom Watson can still play at the top level. There are many other examples, so maybe, just maybe, Federer can reinvent himself once more to give himself the opportunity to win a few more Majors before he retires.
For now, the pressure needs to be completely off for him, which will perhaps help him re-gather that sense of winning-for-fun which he just oozed in his younger days. He needs to learn again how to destroy the weaker players whom he comes across (like Nadal did in stunning style against the very man who knocked Federer out in the previous style).
If Roger regains the ability to play with an “elastic racquet” there is no question that he would start winning again, but perhaps he needs to learn how to adapt to a different style which would bring him success. There are countless examples of footballers who used to destroy defences with their pace, but, as time took its toll, destroyed defences with brains instead of brawn and played killer passes instead. If Federer can take a leaf out their books and learn to wear down players with long rallies and destroy them with a winner after long periods of hard work, then there is every chance of him replicating his old success.
The oldest winner of a Mens’ singles title in a Grand Slam is Ken Rosewall in 1972 at the age of thirty-seven. Tennis was very different then, so the oldest winner of a Grand Slam who is relevant to Roger Federer is Andre Agassi, who won the Australian Open at the age of thirty-two in 2003. If Federer is able to reinvent himself one last time, who would bet against him breaking that record in years to come?
Thank you for reading. Please take a moment to follow me on Twitter @LastWordOnHugo. Support LWOS by following us on Twitter – @LastWordOnSport – and “liking” our Facebook page.
For the latest in sports injury news, check out our friends at Sports Injury Alert.
