Federer Nadal semi final could dictate who is the greatest

Respect: Rafa or Roger?

So nowadays Rafael Nadal and Roger Federer are contesting semi finals, rather than finals, but this could perhaps be more significant than any of the previous encounters when it comes to where each will be placed in the pantheon of the greats.

With Novak Djokovic out following his surprise defeat to Stanislas Wawrinka, the winner of tomorrow's clash will be the clear favourite to take this year's Australian Open title on Sunday.

Should Federer claim his first Grand Slam in almost two years, his longest spell without one, he would gain his 18th career Slam, a seemingly unassailable lead over Nadal, who has 13, especially given the Spaniard's injury record.

However, should Rafa prevail the pendulum would swing in his direction, being just three behind his great rival and almost five years younger than the Swiss.

Both have won all four slams at one point in their career and though Rafa has the distinct advantage when it comes to their head to head record, 22-10, Federer will often have an edge in any argument over a pint given his overall number of Grand Slam titles won.

Perhaps this is a little premature as no one can tell quite what the future will hold in this unpredictable sport (who would have anticipated Djokovic breaking the aforementioned's duopoly) but this match could just give us a definitive answer to who is the sport's greatest ever player.

"The best day of my life" Djokovic proclaims upon winning Wimbledon

Novak Djokovic won Wimbledon for the first time in a four set thriller against Rafael Nadal.

After a few wobbles the Serbian closed the match out 6-4 6-1 1-6 6-3 to be the first man to beat Nadal at SW19 since 2007.

He didn't have it all is own way, though, in a match that had more swings than the local park. But he never expected it to be against one of the best players of all time. Few can doubt, however, that his victory was well deserved and Nadal acknowledged as much afterwards.

All the talk beforehand was whether Djokovic was a rightful world number one, particularly if, as was likely, he would lose to Nadal, whom the Serb was usurping at the top of the rankings.
The first nine games went with serve as both players demonstrated their awesome power and the set was heading inexorably towards a tie-break. But then Djokovic broke in the blink of an eye.

What followed was some of the best tennis of the Serbian's career as his forehand winners left the Spaniard dumfounded. He broke his opponent twice en route to winning the second set 6-1 and there seemed no way back for the outgoing world number one. Djokovic won an impressive eight games out of nine and there was something irrepressible about the way he was playing.

On top of that, Nadal didn't seem to be at his best. At one stage he had won just 20% of his second serves and was committing the kind of unforced errors we normally associate with his opponents.

However, Nadal didn't get to where he is today by giving in easily and he fought back in only the way he can. He was ably assisted by mistakes from Djokovic as the number two seed seemed to tense up with the finishing line in sight.

Nadal started to give out the kind of treatment he was receiving in the previous set as he crushed his opponent 6-1 to take the match into a fourth set. Djokovic chose the worst time to make his first double fault of the match as he faced break point and seemed to be relieved the when the set came to an end.

The crowd were now really getting behind the man from Mallorca as they were desperate for a deciding set. Nadal could see history beckoning as no man in the modern era has recovered from two sets down in a Wimbledon final.

Djokovic, though, had other ideas and broke his opponent early in the fourth set. He seemed set for his third grand slam victory.

However, once again he let it slip as Nadal responded immediately with a break of his own, albeit ably assisted by a net cord when a backhand return had the temerity to hit the net before trickling over to Djokovic's disbelief. The fortune and form were now firmly in the double Wimbledon champion's court.

Just as a fifth set seemed likely, back came Djokovic. Nadal opened with a double fault in the eighth game and was down 0-40 before he knew it. Nadal won the next point but not even he could get out of jail this time.

Serving for the match the audience began to wonder if Djokovic could hold his serve, as well as his nerve, one more time and he didn't disappoint.

Upon winning, he said: "This is the best day of my life and the best game I have ever played on grass." And now he's the new world number one. "This has certainly been a good day at the office."

The game may not have had the consistent quality of the 2007 and 2008 finals between Roger Federer and Nadal but there is a feeling that we are beginning to see the start of a new rivalry at the top of men's tennis. At the moment the advantage is clearly with Djokovic in that tug-of war.

Federer v Nadal. Game, set, match?

The dust has long since settled and Switzerland's Roger Federer has achieved an unprecedented 16 Grand Slam titles, overtaking Pete Sampras' previous best of 14. The Swiss also holds the record for most consecutive weeks as the world's number one, 237. With all this in mind, surely he is the greatest of all time?

Ace: But Nadal has the Indian sign over Federer

Federer can also lay claim to the fact that he has won all four of the Grand Slams, something only six others have done in the history of the game.

While there are several reasons to suggest he is the greatest, there is one over-riding argument against it - Rafael Nadal is better. Until he overcomes Nadal, which now appears unlikely as Federer enters the autumn of his career, doubts will persist as to his true claim to be the best ever.

For a start, the Spaniard is one of the six who has won each of the slams on offer.

And Despite Federer’s record-breaking period as world number one, the rankings can frequently giving a false reading. Much depends on fitness as, when injured, a player accrues no points, whereas even the less talented players can gain points just by playing and winning the occasional match. This contributes towards the quirks regularly on offer in the ATP (Association of Tennis Professionals) rankings. Take note of the Williams sisters’ bizarre rankings of 17 and 29, respectively, in the women's latest list.

It is highly unlikely we would even be talking about Federer's feats had Nadal stayed fit throughout Federer’s period of domination. Mallorca-born Nadal would undoubtedly have won last year’s French Open, something he had done for the previous four years (beating Federer en route to victory on each occasion), but for a knee injury curtailing his progress early on in the tournament. Admittedly, Federer was there to pick up the pieces to win at Roland Garros for the first time, but he has never even come close to defeating Nadal on clay, with the exception of a fortuitous win in Hamburg two years ago.

When we look at the last three years at Wimbledon, a pattern becomes clear. Remember, grass is Federer's strongest surface and therefore the courts of SW19 are ideally suited to the man from Basel.

In 2007 he came through to win the title against Nadal in somewhat fortunate circumstances. Rafa was on top until a knee injury prevented him from performing at his best for the final dozen or so games and Federer managed to take full advantage of his opponent’s disability.

In 2008 Nadal not only outplayed his opponent by putting in the performance of his life, but displayed arguably the greatest tennis performance in the history of the game to beat Federer in that memorable final.

And then to 2009, Federer had been on the wane for the previous 12 months with his record against Nadal deteriorating further still. Their current head to head in Grand Slams stands at 9-6 in the Spaniard's favour, with Nadal winning five of the last six meetings. But those statistics are put into greater perspective when you look at their head to head in Grand Slams, where Nadal leads 5-2, winning the last three in a row.

So it is difficult to imagine Federer winning another grand slam with a fully fit Nadal in opposition.

Even though Federer won Wimbledon in 2009, Nadal’s absence was without doubt the biggest contributing factor.

The competition contained some exciting matches that enthralled the crowd as much any other Wimbledon in previous years but the overall quality was probably at its lowest since 2003. Can you really imagine Andy Roddick pushing Nadal to five sets and to 14 all in the final set? The American has never come close to winning Wimbledon before or since.

Can you really imagine a fully fit Nadal only breaking the American's serve once in nearly 40 games as Federer managed in that final two years ago?

This is not to say that Federer cannot do something about it. Should he dispel the myth that Nadal has the Indian sign over him by actually beating him in a fair contest in the future, and perhaps improve his record against him, then he could definitely be regarded, unequivocally, as the greatest.

It is just that it appears extremely unlikely that he will do that.

Nadal's career, when his knees have been strong enough, has been on an upward curve (at least until the beginning of this year when Djokovic came to the fore) whilst Federer's has been in decline for about three years. And unless he can rediscover that forehand that used to be so deadly, the 16 times grand slam winner will almost certainly never win another major again.

The Guardian’s tennis journalist, Kevin Mitchell, is in no doubt where the big two’s career’s are heading. He said: “At this point in their careers, Nadal (is ahead). He is five years younger, owns
three of the Slams and still getting to finals. Federer has not won a slam since Australia 2010, although he still goes deep into nearly every tournament. I think he will retire after the Olympics.”

Much in the future, of course, depends on Nadal's long-term fitness. When asked if Nadal could eventually overtake Federer’s Grand Slam record of 16, Mitchell said: “He can if his knees hold out.”

The problem for Federer now is that Djokovic has at last found some consistency, squeezing the former world number one down to third in the latest ATP rankings.

Whichever way you look at it, any claims that Federer's is the best of all time will always be overshadowed by Nadal because how can the world's greatest ever player be dominated to such a degree by his ultimate rival?

Could Schumacher be regarded as the best if he was consistently beaten by Mika Hakkinen or Jacques Villeneuve?

Would Mohammed Ali be so revered if George Foreman or Sonny Liston had frequently demonstrated they were better than him?

The answer to all of the above is of course not.

Tears for fears

It was the summer of 1999 and after narrowly missing out on the world titles of 1997 and 98 all seemed set for Michael Schumacher to finally achieve his goal of delivering Ferrari its first Driver's World Championship in two decades. However, fate intervened and the German broke his leg at the British Grand Prix. After a remarkable set of circumstances, including a host of errors from chief rivals McLaren, Schumacher's Ferrari team-mate Eddie Irvine was suddenly propelled into the position of favourite for that year's title as the formula one circus arrived at the final race. After huge amounts of effort and tens of millions of dollars directed towards Schumacher, suddenly the bridesmaid appeared the more likely to be the one to deliver, much to Schuey's embarrassment.

Now fast forward ten years and think tennis. Think Rafael Nadal lifting last week's Australian Open title followed by Roger Federer's tears. After years of hard work and toil, narrowly missing out on the grand slam by winning all four majors, Federer can now see someone else on the horizon set to eclipse him.

In recent years, talk of Federer achieving his aim would gather momentum as the season progressed, particularly as he frequently got off to the perfect start by safely securing the opening slam in Melbourne. Then as spring would turn into summer, the French Open would arrive and so would the dark clouds, if only temporarily, over the man from Basel's season. A routine path to the final would ensue but the combination of clay and Nadal would prove to be too much. Thus, a blight on Federer's season and another year would pass by, despite continued dominance at Wimbledon and the US Open. The season finishing with three out of the four slams in the trophy cabinet. Winning three grand slams in one year occurred to Federer on three occasions (2004, 06 and 07). Last year, however, he won just one- the US Open last September. Nevertheless, this year began with some predicting a return to form and a possible clean sweep.

Nadal's victory last Sunday put paid to that notion and, as a result, it is the Spaniard who now appears most likely to achieve that clean sweep. Having been successful at the previous four French Opens he will be odds on to claim a fifth at Roland Garros this year. Wimbledon follows on quite quickly from Paris and he is the reigning champion at SW19 so will see no reason why he cannot secure a second title. That would be three out of three and the final piece of the jigsaw would arrive in the autumn in New York. This will be the hardest of the slams to win. He has never even reached the final before but after some convincing displays on the hard courts of Melbourne he will feel more confident than ever at Flushing Meadow. There will be many variables to negotiate en route for the Spaniard but perhaps it was the realisation of a dream slipping away and into someone else's hands that was the cause of Federer's tears.

Irvine blew it back in 1999 through a combination of incompetence and an inability to deal with the pressure suddenly thrust upon him, two accusations that could never be thrown the way of Nadal.