TENNIS WIMBLEDON CHAMPIONSHIPS:Beating Pete Sampras's grand slam record at Wimbledon would give Roger Federer immense satisfaction, reports STEVE BIERLEY
IT WILL be an odd feeling. For the first time in six years, Roger Federer, the freshly minted French Open champion hailed as the greatest player of the modern era – perhaps of all time – will arrive at the All England Club with a vital accoutrement missing: the Wimbledon title. Between 2003 and 2007 the grass was his kingdom, five years of sustained brilliance. Then along came Rafael Nadal.
From Wimbledon 2005 to the US Open of 2007, Federer won eight of the 10 grand slam tournaments, a period of extraordinary success unmatched since the days of Rod Laver. The chrysalis became a butterfly in 2003, when the Swiss won his first Wimbledon title, which was also his first slam. Until then his prodigious talent had been recognised by everybody, from his sponsors downwards, yet it remained stubbornly muted at the highest level.
“People kept saying to me, ‘Why doesn’t he win one of the big titles?’” his former coach Peter Lundgren said. “I said, ‘Wait, wait, wait. It will come’. I was 100 per cent sure but even Nike were worried. There was a lot of pressure on him, but before he won Wimbledon for the first time he was simply not ready either physically or mentally. And then it all changed.”
It was typical of the man that after he won the French Open this month, Federer sent messages to the people who had kept faith in him. The one to Lundgren said: “Thank you for always having belief in me.” It was heartfelt, for even with 13 grand slam titles behind him, Federer had entered Paris more than a little uncertain. He had lost to Nadal in the Australian Open final in February, as well as Wimbledon last year in that five-set final reckoned by many, including John McEnroe, to be the greatest of all time.
Yet even McEnroe was having his doubts in the first week of the French Open. “Roger had four of the greatest years in the history of modern tennis and after that there is only one place to go,” he said. “You gotta go down.”
The comment was made before Nadal lost to Sweden’s Robin Soderling in the fourth round. Free of the Spaniard’s shackles – as he will be again at Wimbledon – Federer joined Laver, Fred Perry, Don Budge, Roy Emerson and Andre Agassi as the only men to have won all four grand slam events, while at the same time equalling Pete Sampras’s record of 14 majors. If this was decline, the word obviously needed redefining. “I think he could now go on and win another five or six slams, and he is obviously the overwhelming favourite to win Wimbledon and beat Pete’s record,” Lundgren said.
In tennis the most productive period for men is usually between 22 and 27. Those who win titles after that are few and far between. Federer will be 28 in August. “People talked a lot about me having lost my grip and stuff,” he said. “To some degree I guess it’s true, because I lost my number one ranking, but I didn’t fall out of the top 10 or the top 100. I still played very consistent, especially at grand slam level.
“I had issues last year, and people sometimes don’t give you time to let them heal or for you to figure them out.”
Glandular fever and a back problem, which affected his serve, played a part in his struggles, though fundamentally it was Nadal who preyed on his mind.
Beating Sampras’s record at Wimbledon would clearly give Federer immense satisfaction, and Nadal’s absence has cleared a path for him.
“I don’t know if we’ll ever know who was the greatest of all time, but I’m definitely happy to be right up there,” he said. “I’m not addicted to beating all possible records, though I’m very proud of them. But I think my career should be judged at the very end. Then it’s for other people to decide.”
Many have decided. Simply, the best.
* Guardian Service
