I once explained to somebody that there is a bizarre rule of etiquette in professional cycling which mandates that even a severely injured challenger do his best to complete a race even if he comes second. This allows the winner to say that he was challenged by a genuine competitor. The idea being that a cyclist's greatness is measured only by the ability of the opposition he defeats.
The notion is of course not exclusive to cycling and today Andy Roddick showed us why. Someone who has lost in the 30th game of the fifth set in a Wimbledon final could only have been playing the very greatest. With Federer entering the Championships on the back of a French Open win and with no Nadal to thwart him, the general feeling was that barring a British miracle in the form of Andy Murray, Federer's march into the history books would be an unchallenged and uninspiring affair. Roddick made a mockery of this theroy and everything else that had been said about him being a has-been and, in doing so, confirmed Federer's status as the greatest ever.
I consider myself privileged to have been able to watch a game which overshadowed last years Wimbledon final.
3 comments:
You think so? I would still rate last year's final higher. This was memorable too, but I honestly thought Federer wasn't at the top of his game against Roddick.
*nods in agreement*
Yes, some match it was. And I would have to say both were at the top of their game--77 games are not played as a result of sluggish tennis!
Post a Comment