Records tumble in Federer's wake

Fired up Fed
©Professional Sport / T. Hindley

Roger Federer’s incredible 16-14 final set victory over Andy Roddick gave him record for Grand Slam singles titles – 15, beating Pete Sampras’ previous record.

But that was not the only record broken during the course of the enthralling men’s final. This was the longest men's Grand Slam final in history in terms of games – 77. The previous record was 71 games (1927 Australian Open), and the previous Wimbledon record was 62 games (last year's Wimbledon final between Federer and Rafael Nadal). It also came close to matching the Wimbledon record of most games in a match overall since tiebreaks were introduced (Mark Philippoussis’ 4-6, 6-3, 6-7, 7-6, 20-18 win over Sheng Schalken in the third round in 2000 still holds that honour).

But it was not quite the longest final at Wimbledon in terms of match duration – last year’s had that honour at four hours, 48 minutes. This year’s was four hours and 16 minutes – the joint-second longest, level with Jimmy Connors' win over John McEnroe in 1982.

It was the longest final set in terms of games in the men’s singles final at Wimbledon – the 30-game marathon beats the 24 during A.J. Cooper’s 3-6, 6-3, 6-4, 13-11 win over Australian countryman N.A. Fraser in 1958.

It was also the longest fifth set match in Grand Slam history, beating Rene Lacoste’s 6-4, 4-6, 5-7, 6-3, 11-9 win over Bill Tilden in the 1927 French Open.

In terms of aces, Federer came close to equalling a Wimbledon best of 51, set by Ivo Karlovic against Daniele Bracciali in the first round here in 2005. Federer's 50 beat his previous best of 39 against Janko Tipsarevic at last year’s Australian Open.

View and Submit Comments

Posted by Ian Baker

The journey to the final

Federer on the slide
©EPA / S. Suki

Donald Young was the first player I saw at Wimbledon this year. That name will mean nothing to most since he was the 2006 boy's champion who lost on the first day of Qualifying down at Bank of England Club, Roehampton.

Nobody sleeps out over night to get a ticket for Qualifying, in fact there are more players than spectators present but it represents the first steps on the journey that leads to today: the men's final where the 2009 champion will be crowned.

There are 128 players in the first round of the Gentlemen's Singles and prior to that another 128 men in the first round of qualifying of which 16 reach the main draw. That means there are 127 matches in the main draw and 112 at Qualifying. So after 238 matches there is only one more to decide the 2009 men's singles champion.

For me, the end of Wimbledon is like leaving a loud rock concert, where it is the absence of noise is disconcerting. Likewise, come Monday, it will be the absence of tennis that will be noticeable. Every day since Qualifying Day 1 on June 15 I have looked at an Order of Play and seen the matches that were leading to this. I can remember some matches but most of it is a blur of green grass and tennis whites. I’m not sure what matches I've seen live, watch matches I've seen of TV or whether I've seen a match at all. I can remember everything and I can remember nothing.

It has come down to this.

View and Submit Comments

Posted by Byron Vale

What the papers say

In the run-up to the men's singles final all the talk in the world's media is of whether a revitalised Andy Roddick of the US can stop Swiss supremo Roger Federer setting a new Grand Slam record, and whether the Swiss will be the greatest player of all time if he does so.

The New York Times builds up their man. Christopher Clarey said: “As Andy Roddick plotted and perspired over the years to get back to the place and the round where he once belonged, the opponent he visualised across the net in the Wimbledon final was always Roger Federer.”

But there was a note of realism from Clarey: “Roddick reached the Wimbledon final in 2004 and 2005, losing on both occasions to Federer. Now, at 26, he has a rematch and a chance to play in his first Grand Slam final since the 2006 United States Open. He lost there to Federer, as well.”

The BBC tries to answer the question that has been exercising many of tennis fans – is Roger Federer simply the greatest? If he beats Pete Sampras’ 14 Grand Slams titles, is that enough for the qualification, and is Pete even in the reckoning? Sue Barker said: “I do think he is the greatest player of all time, but it's a close run thing with Rod Laver. I think though tennis has moved on, there are more people playing now and it is tougher to be at the top of the game.”

Tim Henman said: “I thought Roger was the best player of all time before this tournament and the fact that he just constantly adds to the record books simply confirms my thoughts."

Virginia Wade, ladies' champion in 1977, talked up the merits of Laver: “I think Roger is phenomenal, but you have to consider though that Laver was absolutely amazing too and if he hadn't turned professional and missed five years he would have achieved incredible success. Rod was definitely one of the greatest and the way he played the game made you wonder why you ever bothered trying yourself.”

In another BBC report Piers Newbery said of Federer's achievements: “Federer goes into the match with an 18-2 lead in meetings between the pair”, adding “Federer has continued adding to his incredible list of records over the last fortnight, reaching his 21st consecutive Grand Slam semi-final, his 16th out of the last 17 Grand Slam finals, and a seventh straight Wimbledon final. But despite expecting a first child with his new wife, Mirka, he does not expect his motivation to lessen should he win the 15th Grand Slam title on Sunday."

The Sunday Times also eulogised about Federer. Nick Pitt said: “As well as the thundering beauty of his game, there are many statistics to back up his status as the game’s most winning phenomenon. For example, he is contesting his seventh successive Wimbledon final and he has reached the semi-final round of the past 21 grand slam tournaments. Those achievements defy belief, but one hard fact is surely conclusive: it has taken him six years to equal a total of Grand Slam victories that took Sampras twice as many years to amass.”

View and Submit Comments

Posted by Sally Easton

Praise for Roddick

Andy Roddick
©AFP / G. Kirk

Andy Roddick will walk onto Centre Court for his third final and for the third time the man standing across the net from him will be Roger Federer.

If Roddick was one for omens and portents he could look back last year and Rafael Nadal who, on his third appearance in a Wimbledon final against Federer beat the player many had declared unbeatable.

Roddick is a changed man. He has gone from believing he would never be in a Grand Slam final again to being one victory away from the lifting the trophy of his boyhood dreams.

"You know you're going to get aced out there. You know he's going to come up with big shots. You've got to weather the storm and take those small chances when you get the opportunity. That's what it comes down to playing these big matches at the end of these tournaments," said Lleyton Hewitt, the former champion who took him to five sets in the quarter-final.

"I mean, he makes volleys. He doesn't normally miss a lot. You just have to make the passes, and I didn't make as many as I needed to. But I wasn't surprised by anything that he did. I expected him to play very well. I think if he serves like that he's got a chance against anyone, 'cause it comes down to, like I say, a few points in each set. So regardless of whether it's Roger or, you know, me or anybody else, if he serves high 70s with the pace he's got on his serve, he's got a good chance," said Andy Murray, who was beaten despite his overwhelming favouritism and home court advantage.

"In the beginning of his career, I remember back in 2003, he was sometimes standing way back, you know, on the return. But then I played him one year, not on grass, but let's say in 2004, he chipped and charged a lot, you know, came to the net a lot. I've also played him when he's serve and volleyed first and second serve almost. I've had many different looks against Roddick. I enjoy how he leaves everything out on the court. I can only marvel at how incredible his serve is. I like playing against him, not only just because of the record," said Roddick's final opponent Roger Federer.

"Roddick now has more options than he did before. That is going to help him. Five or six years ago we were saying that Andy Roddick would win Wimbledon. Someone who serves that big, you would think he should ," said three-time winner John McEnroe.

"Andy Roddick played the best match I have seen him play in a long time. He took Murray to his limits and he couldn't come through," said Boris Becker.

View and Submit Comments

Posted by Tom Hyde

Gloom surrounds Murray loss

Federer focused

The British papers have been typically gloomy following Andy Murray’s semi-final defeat yesterday .

After the extraordinary highs of last week's Andymonium, journos at The Independent have been quick to compare the loss to the rollercoaster era of Tim Henman, while highlighting Roddick's serve and his opponent's lack of net visits being key in his impressive four set win.

The BBC also remarked that while we have indeed been treated to a great two week's from the Brit, yesterday's loss featured flashbacks of the Andy of old as he stroppily slapped the net and hunched his shoulders.

The Times geared up for Sunday's Rod-Fed ding-dong by focusing on Roddick's recent revival in form, and in particular the effect Roddick's model wife Brooklyn Decker has had. The quick-witted American was feeling glum and on the verge of quitting the sport after being dumped out of Wimbledon last year. However Brooklyn's support and comments about his 'nice bum' apparently made him think again, rather unluckily for Murray. Meanwhile The Guardian has concentrated it's match preview on whether Roddick can overcome the curse of being a one Grand Slam wonder.

Across the pond, the New York Times poked fun at Murray's lose saying the UK is used to sporting failures, while The LA Times continued to rub in their glee as they pointed out that three of the four players contesting the finals are from the US.

The lack of focus on Federer in the press proves there isn't really much more that can be said about the super Swiss. The Telegraph have instead opted to reach for comments from tennis stars of old in a fitting tribute to the five-times Wimbledon winner as he prepares to overtake Pete Sampras' record of 15 Grand Slam titles.

View and Submit Comments

Posted by Beci Wood

Praise for Federer

Federer smash
©Reuters / T. Melville

Roger Federer has advanced to his seventh consecutive Wimbledon final and the nature of his victories this tournament have recalled the imperious Federer of old, and certainly not a player who, before this year's French Open, many commentators had called a spent force.

The players he has beaten en route to the final match where Andy Roddick waits have been unanimous, this is a player still at the peak of his powers.

"There aren't really any weaknesses. I think he moves such smooth ways and has such good defensive play. The slice bites a lot. You know, when you think sometimes you might get a relatively easy volley, he kind of either dinks it in front of you, or he made two spectacular slice lobs over my head at important points," said Tommy Haas, the former world No.2 who lost their semi-final in straight sets.

"He's maybe like best player ever, but on the grass he's, you know, by far best I think. I mean, he don't like when the ball jumps higher, and over here, you know, everything is around his waist because the ball jumps lower. I don't know. It suits his game unbelievable I think. The reason why he was No. 1 and also why he's maybe the best player ever is because in the tight situations he can play his best tennis. It is difficult, sure," said Ivo Karlovic, who had not lost a service game all tournament until he was undone in straight sets at the hands of Federer.

"I think he's the biggest favorite. If he plays well, I think he's gonna win. But, you know, he definitely need to play well every match. I think he played well, like always when we played. He's a great grass court player, and I think he's the faster surface he plays on, I think the more aggressive he plays," said Robin Soderling, having lost to Federer in the French Open final, the Swede was beaten again in the fourth round here.

"It's always nice to play against him. It's a funny boy. It's always nice, so actually it's quite funny. Unfortunate that most of the time you gonna lose. It sounds maybe stupid, but always if I play very aggressive he just had the better answer and put me on the right foot. So, yeah, he was just too good," said Philipp Kohlschreiber, the only player to win a set off Federer at the tournament so far — and that was via a tie-break.

"I think Federer has a good return. I don't think that it's incredible. He doesn't break serve as much as a lot of the guys. But he'll make Andy play. And Andy gives him enough chances, Roger's gonna take them. That's the one thing he needs to serve very well, especially at the start of all of the games to try and get ahead, not give Roger that chance to sort of swing freely at balls. If he can always sort of stay 15 up, 15 Love, 30 Love up in games, it's gonna be tough. But obviously Roger is the favorite. If he plays his best and passes well, then there's no reason why he can't win," said Andy Murray, the player who lost to Roddick in the semi-finals.

"He conducts himself as all champions do. He's just a super champion," Venus Williams, back-to-back champion and ladies finalist.

"I like how he hates to lose," Serena Williams, ladies finalist and current Australian and US Open champion.

"I believe he is the greatest player of all time. He has won Grand Slams on all four surfaces, he has won 14 in total and is on the verge of winning his 15th here," Boris Becker, three-times champion and youngest winner here.

View and Submit Comments

Posted by Tom Hyde

Federer and Lendl vying in the record stakes

Federer into the final
©Getty Images / H. Blair

In defeating Tommy Haas on Friday, Roger Federer booked his place in a seventh consecutive Wimbledon final. Though that is a record (Open Era or otherwise) for The Championships, it is not a Grand Slam best. Ivan Lendl made through to the final Sunday of the US Open from 1982 – 1989, with three titles sandwiched in between five defeats.

That record is safe for the moment, but Sunday will take Federer past the Czech legend in terms of total Grand Slam finals. Lendl contested 19 major finals, winning eight, but Federer is now up to 20. Of those, he has won 14, lost five (three at the French, one each at Wimbledon and Australia – all to Rafael Nadal), with the 20th to come on Sunday.

Speaking of Nadal, he and Federer have met in 16 ATP finals (Nadal winning 11, Federer five), but that is not yet a match for Lendl and John McEnroe, who met in 19 finals, with the Czech taking 11 and the American eight. Between 1983 and 1987, the pair met 15 times, always in a final.

View and Submit Comments

Posted by Drew Lilley

What papers say on the ladies' semis

After 126 matches in this year’s ladies’ singles Championships, we’re down to the final which most of the media says it saw coming all along. Williams v Williams. Venus v Serena.

At the Times, Simon Barnes says: “It’s an all-Williams final. Again. Deal with it. There is no-one better. Each of the Williams sisters, each in her different way, played an extraordinary match in the semi-finals on Centre Court yesterday, and each showed that when it comes to the sharp end of a Grand Slam tournament, the name Williams gives you an insuperable advantage.”

But it was close to being a different story. As Ravi Ubha at ESPN says: “If Serena hadn't come up with some timely aces -- there were 20 overall, 16 in the final two sets -- cleaned a few lines and found a bit of luck, she would have been disappointed for the second consecutive Grand Slam. The 27-year-old blew a break lead in the third set to mentally fragile Svetlana Kuznetsova in the quarter-finals of the French Open. .. Serena admitted she got tight in Paris. No sign of that Thursday [at Wimbledon].”

And Christopher Clarey at the New York Times agrees:

“The surprise was that Serena Williams was just a point away from losing this classic to Elena Dementieva. While the second-seeded Williams would be pushed, stretched and shaken on this warm afternoon on Centre Court, she could not be beaten. With the crowd audibly eager for a changing of the guard and a Dementieva victory, Williams maintained the status quo, breaking Dementieva’s serve in the 13th game with a clean backhand winner and then taking good care of her own serve to win.”

The Venus semi-final was as dramatic for opposite reasons. Clarey adds. “Despite the No. 1 next to her name in the rankings and the Wimbledon seedings, Dinara Safina was a distant No. 2 in this match as Venus overwhelmed her, 6-1, 6-0, in 51 minutes. It was the most lopsided women’s semifinal here in 40 years. Billie Jean King, one of Venus’s role models, defeated Rosie Casals by the same score in 1969.”

The BBC Sport website’s Caroline Cheese expresses similar views on Venus’s win. “The match all but undid the good work of the first semi-final, a pulsating encounter which had provided a much-needed fillip for women's tennis. One criticism directed at the women's game is that Safina has risen to the top of the women's rankings without winning a Grand Slam title. That record remains after a miserable first appearance in the Wimbledon semi-finals, the Russian completely outclassed by Venus in 51 minutes.”

Richard Hinds for the Sydney Morning Herald admires Venus’s play: “Despite the heavy bandage she has worn on her knee here, the 29-year-old Venus gave a brief, but astonishing demonstration of why she is now considered one of the great grass-court players of the modern era, hitting the ball with irresistible power and precision from the baseline and never giving the increasing bemused Russian a chance.”

At the end of his piece in The Times’, Barnes goes on to suggest that, after nearly a decade of dominance, the end of the sisters’ reign may be in striking distance “No doubt we are all suffering a little from Williams fatigue and would relish a new storyline, a new star. Well, that will happen in due course. Their decline is beginning, you can see it in the struggles and the strapping, but there’s no-one good enough to topple them just yet, so savour the longevity as well, savour the way their non-tennis stuff — Venus’s interior design, Serena’s fashion — keeps their minds fresh and their appetites keen. Look, the Williams sisters are absolutely bloody amazing. Deal with it.”

View and Submit Comments

Posted by Sally Easton

Navratilova hits out at grunters

Wimbledon legend Martina Navratilova wants grunting to disappear from tennis, saying that players who did it were putting themselves at a disadvantage.

In an exclusive interview with www.wimbledon.org, Navratilova said: "There's no reason to be making that noise when you hit a ball. We're not lifting 200 pounds over our heads and, quite frankly, I think it's counterproductive. It takes that amount of effort and energy to make that kind of noise. When players get tired, they’re not making that noise because they do not have the energy any more.

"I would actually suggest to my player: 'You're actually making it worse for yourself'. I would be coaching my player not to do it. Never mind it’s against the rules, it’s all bad for my player. When they’re yelling that loudly, it's a hindrance.

"The umpire needs to step up to the plate and tell them to stop. And if they don't, it should be a point penalty. I can guarantee you that once they start giving out point penalties they will stop doing it."

Navratilova, who won nine Wimbledon singles titles and is appearing here in the ladies’ invitational doubles, had earlier sparked controversy when she told the International Tennis Federation's World Champions' Dinner during the French Open that grunting was cheating.

However, respected tennis coach Nick Bollettieri later hit back at Navratilova's claims, saying: "Martina said that it is cheating, but I can categorically state that it is not and she knows that."

But Navratilova is still sticking to her position. "I'm not going to get into it with Nick," she said. "We might have a friendly disagreement but the fact of the matter is that the grunting – it's not even grunting, it's shrieking – has got to subside, if not disappear all together because it is not necessary."

View and Submit Comments

Posted by Ian Baker

Will the roof be raised again?

Wimbledon by night
©AELTC / T. Lovelock

We have been blessed with some magnificent weather so far, but, according to the Met Office, there is a 60% chance of showers on Friday.

This could mean that the Centre Court roof, which made its debut on Monday, may come back into action for either or both of the men’s singles quarter-finals.

So how can the four players prepare for that eventuality. The only one who has experienced it is Andy Murray, who noted that conditions were the increasingly humid during his roof-covered fourth round match against Stanislas Wawrinka.

But he stressed that that should not be interpreted as a criticism of the roof. He clarified: “I think it was made out that I was complaining about the roof. I wasn't at all. I gave an honest and pretty fair assessment of how it played. It does play slower, which is not a complaint. It's more humid.

“It doesn't make a difference to how I'm going to approach the match. You just have to alter your game style slightly because it's a slower court. But I don't mind if it's indoors or outdoors.

“The one thing that I think is important is that if you are going to play under the roof, you [are told] half an hour in advance. That's all that I would ask for, which I don't think is unreasonable."

With Murray's semi-final opponent Andy Roddick yet to play under the roof, he could be at a disadvantage.

The American said: “Obviously, I'd kind of rather know what I was in for than have it be a surprise. That’s not really something I have too much control over. You just deal with it the best you can.”

Richard Krajicek, the 1996 men’s winner, believes the roof can create a different kind of match.

“I love indoor tennis,” the Dutchman said. “There’s no sun or wind and I think it can change a match. Some guys are good in the wind and some not so good. If there’s no wind, the advantage can go to the opponent. I understand tradition but I like the roof and think it’s good for tennis.”

According to Tracy Austin, the former player and now commentator, the roof has given the Championships something extra.
“The roof looks like it belongs there, it looks like the stadium was built with the roof,” she said. “It was quite a different atmosphere on Monday because obviously the first match played under the roof was Amelie Mauresmo and Dinara Safina.

“As soon as that roof closed people started to clap and were enjoying themselves. This was history in the making. And then there was the sound of the ball – the echo and the claps got louder. It was wonderful. It’s very light, it’s transparent and then sun comes through.

“I got home and watched the Murray match on television. It was kind of fun to be able to go home and still have some tennis to watch before you go to sleep. And to see those shots at night where everything was dark except for the Centre Court was really beautiful.”

View and Submit Comments

Posted by Ian Baker