Nadal and Federer - Both Champions at Wimbledon

Is it just me or do others feel a bit sad about Federer’s loss at the All England Lawn and Tennis Club? Heck, imagine how Federer feels…

Wimbledon . Roger Federer.

If you like tennis, then you know that those two go hand in hand. When we hear the name of that grass court Grand Slam event, we immediately picture him . The king. The champion. Just like we used to do with Pete Sampras. Maybe even Bjorn Borg. Or, yes, John McEnroe. It’s quite a list. As of last night, however, another name has been added to the list of tennis greats.

Rafael Nadal.

In one of the closest, most exciting tennis matches of all time, Nadal managed to win just a few more points to be declared the official winner of the 2008 Men’s Final at Wimbledon.

But …

Both Nadal and Federer played a match like no other. I remember the 1980 Borg/McEnroe classic. I enjoyed the Sampras/Agassi trumped up rivalry. But this? Whoa. The level of play by these two men was something I’ve just not seen. If ever there were a game that proves it’s not whether you win or lose but how you play the game, I’d have to say this was it. They played with skill, tenacity, strength, poise and finesse.

When the match began, I was a loyal Federer fan but, by the time breakfast at Wimbledon turned into dinner, I felt undeniable respect and admiration for Rafa. Either man deserved to take home that golden trophy.

My family watched with bated breath , shrieked at the amazing, stunning shots as points were won, sighed and slumped when surprising, disappointing errors were made. The match was filled with emotion (even for the spectators) - for nearly five hours.

When it was all over, we felt a bit dazed, filled with awe and respect for these two remarkable athletes.

But so sad for Federer.

Roger Federer (photo by D. Rawcliffe/Propaganda)

After a brief period of stunned silence, my young son said something like this:

“Mom, Federer’s still #1 and maybe he can win the U.S. Open or the Australian but you have to realize…Nadal is approaching or reaching his peak and Federer, he’s what, 26 (almost 27?) well, let’s just say he’s been playing longer [he extends his cupped hands and demonstrates, his left hand making a rising curve, then, with his right hand, he shows a declining slope]. So here’s Nadal, age 22 [left hand above the right] but, if Federer had been at his peak now ? Well, come on, then he would have crushed him.”

I looked at him skeptically.

“Okay, well, maybe not crushed him, but he would have beaten him, say, 6-4, 6-2, 6-4 or something. Nadal beat him today only because they’re peaking at different times.”

Then I smiled, realizing he was trying to make both of us feel better. Hmm…okay, son. Thanks for that.

If you didn’t watch the match, I recommend that you find it online and spend some time with it. It’s phenomenal . Federer was down the first two sets 6-4, 6-4, won the third set in a tie break, then won the next set to bring it to a sudden death fifth set. The first one to win by two games would be crowned the champion.

I’ll spare you the details here, but if you want to know them, there are plenty of sites you can visit .

Instead, I’d like to focus on how much we can learn from those two players. I talked to my kids about how well they both handled the situation. Federer never gave up. Never looked as if he thought he didn’t have a chance. These guys both wanted to win and they both worked their tails off to try to do just that. They whaled on that ball. Hustled to get shots that looked impossible to reach. Managed to return shots when spectators often thought the point was over. Served aces at critical moments. Played for nearly five hours.

Endurance. Perseverance. Graciousness in winning (and in losing). Passion. It was all there on Centre Court.

I hope my kids will always remember this match. I hope that, if ever they’re faced with a seemingly unstoppable foe, they’ll keep trying, even when success seems highly unlikely (and the statistics support that notion). I hope that, when it’s all over, they’re able to speak well of their opponent and give credit where credit is due. I hope they’ll be able to leave the match (or negotiation or championship game) with their heads held high, recognizing that, even if they didn’t win, as long as they played their absolute best they can be proud.

Kudos to both Rafa and Roger. You’re both champions for raising the level of tennis to an exciting, exhilarating height, for acknowledging the greatness of the match without tearing each other down, and for managing to look poised and composed when you needed to (despite the intense emotions you must have been feeling). Unlike most sporting events or Academy Awards, viewers will not forget the runner-up. You’ll both be remembered and revered. It’s the match that will go down in history, the Federer/Nadal Wimbledon match of 2008. It will be discussed, referred to and studied. We’ll want to watch it again and again. Because both players made the match what it was. Thanks, gentlemen, for giving us the match of a lifetime.

Roger Federer and Rafael Nadal - Wimbledon 2008

(Photo by V. Donev/EPA)

Update: Here’s another view of the significance of the match (article appeared in the New York Times, July 8, 2008) . The Times blew it, IMO, on Monday, July 7, by having a fluff article about the reporter’s choosing to watch “Hancock” instead of the match (and regretting it). This article (a day late) redeems the Times ever so slightly…

Yep, I might be obsessed but here’s a link to the radio show I devoted to Wimbledon this week!