Today Novak Djokovic has defeated Rafael Nadal in the quarter finals of the French Open. This would mark the second loss in this tournament by Nadal - his only other loss came at Roland Garros was also in the quarter finals against Soderling in 2009. Today's match will probably become the Djoker's most important triumph over the undisputed King of Clay. The day before [yesterday] Roger Federer lost against fellow countryman Stanislaw Wawrinka on what some journalist call it "too easy". More on that later.
I am a die-hard Roger Federer fan.
It wouldn't be a surprise since he is still the most popular player in the world. I have my reasons. Since I was little I had a liking to tennis, maybe because my dad liked it or I just got it. Maybe it was difficulty of following a tournament or players at the time, or maybe it was more inclined to playing with my toys - It wouldn't be until 2008 when I would become a tennis fanatic. Before I saw any of Federer's matches, all I'd keep hearing was his name. I wanted to she Sharapova's matches, but since none of the players in the WTA other than Serena Williams were as consistent as the males; it was hard to catch Maria's matches. So, at the 2008 US Open, I decided it was time to give the men and that dreaded Swiss player a watch - before the Open he had suffered an early exit in Cincinnati, which had made news, and got my interest up. And ever since I understood all the reasons why Roger Federer is loved all over the world.
Note: I am just writing out of memory and not looking into stats. So correct me if I am wrong.
I believe that Roger Federer deserves his greatest of all time [GOAT] title for all the things he has done in the world of tennis - he brought it back to life, he has taken it to the next level. But if we limit it to the tennis court on what can be done with a ball and a racquet - I have to give it to Novak Djokovic. What this guy has accomplished in the last five years is unbelievable. Now, Dojokovic may not break the seventeen slam record or the weeks at number one records that Federer has, nor he may never get to nine titles on a single slam like Nadal - Nole has his own records, but his best quality is that he can beat both in convincing fashion on their good days.
I have yet to see any real weaknesses on Novak Djokovic, since his revamped serve and gluten-free diet [circa late 2009] - he has no real nemesis, yet. He doesn't seem to need one. This may read ridiculous, but Roger Federer's air of dominance started to significantly dwindle with Andy Roddick's retirement. See, Federer was to Roddick what Nadal is to Federer. Although these seem to be one-sided rivalries given the records, these are important foundations for the success of Federer and Nadal respectively. Now, the tennis A-Rod may only have one slam to his name, but that's thanks to Roger. Federer on the other hand could have achieved the Grand Slam twice had it not been for Rafa. You will hear Rafa talk about Roger with a lot of respect. Don't kid yourself, Nadal knows he can beat Federer. He knows he can destroy him [may it be skill or match-up rules, doesn't matter]. but he plays against Roger like it was life depended on it every single point. And it kind of does. Rafa needs Roger to increase his confidence; to assure himself that he can win tournaments - I believe it was the same for Roger. So, does Rafa have a nemesis? Why yes, it's the Nole - the only player to be able to beat the King of Clay consistently, in clay - well, at least since gluten has left Novak's menu. Novak 2.0 is to Rafa Nadal and Andy Murray what Federer was to many players when the Majesty was untouchable.
I hate to admit all of this. It's not that I dislike Djokovic as a player. Ever since he started to make his way into the tennis world - people noticed him. He was known for being a great imitator; and he showed he could play with the 2008 Australian Open to his name - even back then. It's just that his style is rather 'standard' - if you can call his rubberband body to be within standard levels that is. He doesn't have the aesthetic finesse that Roger posesses, nor does he have that animalistic air and style of Rafa. No, Novak is just a nimble-looking guy, a two-handed back-hand, great shots all around. Djokovic right now is the embodiment of a complete player, he has no problem completely adapting his game to beat yours - but feels rather common at the same time. Maybe that's what it is; the reason why over the years I struggle in rooting for the new champ, Novak, is because I am unable to view his genius on the television screen. How do you think he has been able to beat Nadal in clay the way he has? Djokovic is the only player to be able to control Nadal's brutal top-spin. So yes, I'm calling it, Djokovic's best attribute is his ability to control spins - makes sense after years of playing catch-up with monster hits coming his way by the former top two players in the world.
We don't know what holds for Novak in the future. Will he ever find the Rafa to his Roger? We really don't know. Which brings me to Federer and his loss against Wawrinka. Every fucking time Roger loses they want the guy to retire. That was since I started watching. Seven fucking years I have had the displeasure of running into media articles talking about how Federer is done... How about they talk about Stan Wawrinka as an athlete instead of trashing the other player. Whenever I see the Wawrinka, I see a stronger version of Federer - Stan can serve, rally, and hit harder shots than Roger; one handed-backhand and all. Sure, Federer is the better player in many other aspects; Stan is less consistent. But when the Stanimal is on - what other player has been able to break the Nole's spirit? Recall the 2014 Australian Open final. Am I implying that Stan could be Nole's bane? Not really. However, they are both in the semifinals of this year's Roland Garros - separate draws.
\
