Bleacher Report - Articles by Poulomee Basu

Rafael Nadal Camp Provides More Questions Than Answers

Poulomee Basu — Mon, 07 Sep 2009 12:46:01 -0400

Okay, when was the last time Rafael Nadal made excuses in a press conference? I know: after his loss to Juan Martin del Potro in Miami five months ago. He played one of the worst matches I have seen him playing and seemed strangely disinvested on court.

He said there was a reason for his poor play: "A personal one." And what did we learn three months later? He had been playing with sore knees for a while and his parents were officially separating.

For once, it was okay for Rafa to be human. To not be the tireless wining machine and feel vulnerable. And irritable.

There were traces of the same behaviour yesterday after his escape from the continuous onslaught of Nicholas Almagro.

Nadal’s serve was off. His movement around the court was questionable. His tank was clearly running at no more than 75 percent. The reason became very clear when a trainer treated his abdomen muscles for a full five minutes in the third set. There were rumours of yet another injury.

And what did Rafa say when he was asked about it? “I don’t want to talk about it.” Not only did he “not talk,” he was also unusually sullen during his post-match interview. Not the Rafa we are used to seeing.

So what really is happening in the Nadal camp? Questions have been flowing nonstop ever since he pulled out of the tour with tendinitis at the end of last year.

First it was the knees. Rafa clearly put a stop to all that speculation about being “burnt out” by wining the Australian Open—his first hard court slam. Victory was sweet.

Then came assaults on his new clothing and gear. Was he becoming a sellout? Why was Nike trying selling us a stereotypical world No. 1? Worse, why was Nadal letting them?

No sooner than we had come to accept him in his new get-up, there was uproar about his scheduling. Why was Rafa playing at events like Rotterdam Barcelona and Madrid? Was it the points, the money, or simply the obligation to please the home crowd? The exact reason was never known.

Then came the biggest blow to his career—a plum injury in the middle of the tennis summer. Defence of the Wimbledon crown was not meant to be. Why was Nadal playing with hurting knees? Who was answerable for his condition? Why wasn’t he foresighted enough to understand the impacts of so much tennis on his already vulnerable knees?

The questions continued throughout Wimbledon.

Rafa made his return at Montréal after two months away from the sport. Sure, he lost his No. 1 ranking, but on the upside, he was fresher than ever to stake claim to the only Slam he is yet to win. Now that he was back with a flourish, many of his fans were hoping for a hassle-free US Open for Rafa.

But as soon as he made his tournament debut, many noticed a very significant change—Rafa suddenly looked much slimmer. Now this can be attributed to his t-shirt wearing, hair cropping, or the fact that he hasn’t trained as much in the past two months as he usually does, but he looks unquestionably smaller in his frame.

Greg Rusedski (@Sky Sports) seems to think he has "intentionally" lost some of his muscle mass to ease up the pressure on his knees. Plausible explanation? Maybe.

Yesterday’s injury seems to have opened yet another can of worms for Rafael Nadal. When I opened my Google browser this morning, there were over 1,000 new news articles devoted just to the “new injury which is plaguing the world No. 3.”

The extent of this injury is presently unknown, and Rafa has flatly refused to shed any more light on it. As tennis fans, it leaves us with no choice but to wait and watch.

Gael Monfils is up next. Not only is he more athletic than Almagro, he is also much faster. If Monfils serves well, Nadal could suffer. Plus we can all count on Monfils to fully expose any fault with Rafa’s movement.

According to Nadal, he will be out there giving 100 percent. Well, that’s nothing new, is it? He always gets an "A" for effort from even his worst critics.

However, there are other questions begging answers of Rafael Nadal, his "new injury" being just one of them. Surely the best way to answer them all would be to keep your head down and work hard. But exactly how hard is he going to push himself?

Is there a magical threshold which allows him all of his gladiatorial battle glory but beyond which he risks irreparable damage? We don't know yet.

As someone who knows how much Rafa likes to win, even at the cost of self-destruction, I hope his relentless chase of this elusive Slam doesn’t hurt him in the long run.

Rest up, Rafa. Tomorrow you fight again.

Bidding Adieu to Marat Safin

Poulomee Basu — Thu, 03 Sep 2009 09:41:37 -0400

I know I must be the nth person writing an article based on this topic today, but I simply had to. I had to say goodbye to one of my favourite tennis players—Marat Safin.

His loss to Jurgen Melzer yesterday marked the end of Marat's grand slam dreams. How ironic is the fact that he lost in the first round of the tournament which gave him his his first taste of tennis glory?

In my opinion if there was anybody out there who had the raw talent to give Roger Federer sleepless nights, it was Marat Safin. There was ample evidence to this claim when Marat started out—demolishing Pete Sampras to win the US Open nine years ago. The tennis world sat up, and aficionados were quick to crown him the successor to Pistol Pete. But all didn't go according to plan.

A lot of people would say “let’s not lose perspective here”—Marat did have a glittering career—two grand slams titles are a big deal. Besides that being the world number one, winning multiple ATP titles and leading his country to Davis Cup glory are extremely significant achievements in a tennis player’s life.

Every tennis player would like to taste the kind of success Marat basked in. Very true. And add to it the fact that he has always managed to be himself irrespective of the highs and lows of his tennis; Marat's career certainly seems enviable.

Yet the questions persist—what if he had realised his true potential? Could he have been in the tennis hall of fame, with the McEnroes and Bjorgs, with seven or 10 grand slam titles?

Maybe the old adage is true for people like Marat. Maybe the brighter they burn the quicker they burn out. Maybe he never had it in him to have a sustained, successful and conventional tennis career like Federer. Maybe he would have lost half of his charisma if he did.

If there was one thing which was predictable with Marat, it was his unpredictability. The kind of unpredictability which makes you wonder in awe when he hits a backhand to beat a top player one day, and the next day gets beaten by a player like me.

Can anyone imagine Marat without this aura of unpredictability? I can’t.

One thing became increasingly clear as his career unfolded—only Marat Safin could beat Marat Safin. The days he conquered his mental demons he freed himself up to play up some truly sensational tennis. Then again on the other days he would be in throes of desperation, a fallen hero without his powers, struggling to string a couple of points together.

Over the years Marat has entertained hordes of fans, who thronged in their thousands to see him; Marat the player, Marat the bona fide tennis star, Marat the act. Unfortunately or fortunately the lines between the many avatars of Marat Safin got blurred. He became part athlete, part entertainer.

Even though Marat didn’t necessarily like the honour bestowed upon him stating vehemently that “people should go to the circus if they want to see a clown,” everything Marat did grabbed headlines. Whether he was throwing rackets, shouting at the umpires or plainly cursing away in rapid Russian—people couldn’t have enough of the spitfire called Marat Safin.

I can think of very few athletes who have been so popular amongst both male and female fans. The men envied his playboy lifestyle and women his Adonis-blessed-perfectly-proportional good looks. But looks apart people liked Marat because they could relate to him. He was never squeaky clean.

His tears, his temper, his tantrums and everything in between made him and his tennis real. He was the guy who didn’t always win, but never failed to entertain. He was high on talent but low on self discipline. He was volatile, he was crude but he adored his fans. Ultimately he was the guy who had a heart full of passion but it burnt out all too quickly.

Whatever the reasons, I was (and am) a Marat Safin fan. I loved him on court and loved him off it. I adored his fearlessness. And his stupidity. I felt the pain when he fought with his psychological demons and cried when he was on the verge of tears. I was enraged when people called him a flash in the pan and wanted to hug him when he said he has had enough.

Like all his other fans I was hoping for a last hurray from Marat before he hung up his racket, but I guess it was not meant to be.

Yesterday he might have bid adieu to grand slam tennis but it will take his fans a while to say goodbye to him. Characters like Marat Safin are rare in today’s politically correct world of men’s tennis—and if there is one thing I m sure of it is this—we won’t be seeing someone like him in a long time.

Roland Garros 2009: Rafael Nadal Thunders Past Lleyton Hewitt

Poulomee Basu — Fri, 29 May 2009 12:31:11 -0400

Lleyton Hewitt and Rafael Nadal have much in common. Their nerves of steel, their 'road-runner' inspired quick feet, their hunger to succeed, and, most importantly, their unyielding minds. More so, the two share a genuine camaraderie off the court.

All these reasons were the perfect recipe for me to expect a gritty duel on the red dirt of Paris.

The match began under clear skies, but Lleyton Hewitt's path to victory became more foggy by the minute.

It was established fairly quickly that Nadal was in good touch. There was going to be no “getting into the match gradually” for him. He was already into it.

The first set was a hasty affair, wrapped up at 6-1 in Rafa’s favour. And a break was firmly secured in the opening game of the second set. This worked as a much-needed wake up call for Lleyton as he won the next three games in a row.

However, his joy was short-lived. After that point in the match, everything Hewitt did, Nadal did better. The second set was a mediocre 6-3 for Hewitt.

The crowds at Philip Chatrier saw plenty of venomous shots from Nadal. But the way he broke Hewitt to go up 4-3 in the second set was just breathtaking.

What looked like a simple wrist flick from Nadal at maximum stretch was by far the best winner of the match. And it was hit well enough to drill a hole in Hewitt’s heart.

The third set was no different. After racing away for a 3-0 lead, Rafa made it clear it was not about simply winning the match anymore.

He wanted to make a statement.

The last few games were was as ruthless a display of power, speed, and offense as I have ever seen. Not only was Rafa striking every single ball with viscous spin and accuracy, his forehand today was beyond lethal. It looked as if he could hit winners from anywhere he wanted.

The last set finished the same as the first—6-1.

In Hewitt’s defense, he did not play a bad match at all. On the contrary, he played very intelligently but was comprehensively outplayed ball for ball. His shot selection and execution were great, but he was dispatched with disdain.

His spirit was strong and he won every rally at least thrice to win the point, but it was STILL nowhere close to enough. He mixed up his shots as much as he could to retain the surprise element.

Although you can flummox Nadal for a few games on his favourite surface, you aren’t going to outwit him.

The numbers speak for themselves. What did Hewitt have to show for his courageous display? Five games. That’s all.

A dialogue of Pirates of the Caribbean came to my mind: "Take what you can, Give nothing back." Our pirate sure seemed to believe in that philosophy today.

It might not have been a battle-royale like I thought it would be, but Nadal’s victory today sends an ominous message to the locker room.

He might not have been terribly sharp in his two previous matches, but he is in sublime touch now. He can bring his "A" game when he wants to, but is still content winning matches comfortably at 80 percent capacity.

Anybody looking for any weaknesses in his game (his knees or his mental outlook), do NOT rest assured; they seem nothing more than figments of your imagination.

The commentators mentioned Kevin Kim today who once said, “Playing Nadal is like crossing the Sahara desert—all you can see is sand, hills, and no respite.”

I think Hewitt might agree with Kevin tonight.

Roland Garros 2009: Maria Sharapova Is back with a Vengeance

Poulomee Basu — Wed, 27 May 2009 11:49:07 -0400

In a superb display of athleticism and mental tenacity, Maria Sharapova defeated Nadia Petrova in a tantalising secondround match on the fourth day of Roland Garros 2009.

The match today saw Nadia Petrova well-posed to cause the first major upset of the French Open this year. Maria made a bright start but started struggling soon after, losing the second set at 1-6. Petrova seemed to be in cruise control of the match after that, while Sharapova’s errors piled on in numbers.

People were already starting to write obituaries about the comeback which was “not meant to be."

But Sharapova never gave up. Even though she trailed Petrova in the final set, she found some of her best tennis when she needed it most. Several aces, break points, double faults, and forehands later; she took the match at 8-6.

On paper it may have seemed a simple second round victory over an adversary who is no longer a potential grand-slam-winning threat, but anyone who saw the match would agree that Maria Sharapova displayed something much more than just tennis on court today.

It’s not easy to make any sort of comeback, and a comeback after a career-threatening injury has got to be the worst kind. But Maria displayed today what all of us already know but stare agape with wonder every time we see it demonstrated on a tennis court.

The victories in tennis are often won in your head. If you believe, you will win. If you fight, you will overcome your fears and insecurities. If you keep your eye on the finish line and your spirits high, glory will be yours.

It was not only a shoulder that was bothering Maria; she was scared of never being able to play her best tennis again. And although her tennis today was not flawless, traces of brilliance were abundant.

And most importantly it was refreshing to see that her year-long injury has not injured her spirit at all. Or her hunger to win.

The queen is back ladies and gentlemen.

And with a vengeance.

When Tennis Married Fashion: Spotlight On Rafael Nadal

Poulomee Basu — Fri, 22 May 2009 16:15:02 -0400

Well the French Open is upon us and i daresay it will be incomplete without a little chit chat about Fashion!

And who else to focus on than the flavour of the season. Rafael Nadal. So here is a mini tribute of sorts to the man gunning for making it five in a row in the fashion capital.

The two words which have become synonymous with Rafa these days seem to be -Gifted and Gorgeous! And not to forget he remains a photographer’s ultimate delight. It could be the sheer power of his shots, the entertaining on and off court antics, or the very visible abdomen; the reasons hardly matter. What matters are the results. And boy do we like them.

Ever since his early days Rafa’s style has been a natural extension of his persona - a young, powerful guy who likes to defy convention. The fact that he comes from a relaxed “holiday” island is also very evident – in his choice of bright colours and tendency to refrain from grey or black. But there are exceptions to this rule – like this photo shoot which he did for Spanish vogue after his first major in 2005.

I think these are some of my favourite shots of him till date, mainly because he looks so like the effervescent teenager that he actually was. He looks 19. Not someone who is trying to be fashionable. And that’s a key element with Rafa – when it comes to fashion – he never tries too hard.

Enough has been spoken about his on court apparel already. In my opinion his sleeveless t and Capri pants, along with cheeky bandanas was the most distinct style statement that men’s tennis has seen in ages. By switching to a more orthodox (read boring) gear, Nike has taken away a bit of good old fashioned Rafa from the fans. Although I understand the intention to create a more marketable “world number 1”, Nike’s decision to single handedly rob Nadal of his signature style does seem like overkill.

All that notwithstanding, the “emperor’s new (and very bright) clothes” might have the potential to generate more revenue, what it doesn’t have is enough character. Or oomph.

But just as I am writing this i wonder that although he is guaranteed a lot of flak for sporting a bright shade of fuchsia; who else on the tour would be able to carry it off?

It would be safe to say none.

Any mention of his fashion sense would be incomplete without talking about his Nike adverts. Varying from pure commercial to editorial, these shots have always worked very well for Rafa. Not only does he wear the clothes, he takes to the Nike ideology like a fish to water. And being a “t shirt and shorts kinda fella” in real life works beautifully to his advantage.

Now it’s practically a given that having a good body is a huge asset in the race to be fashion forward. And this is where Rafa scores big time. Not only does he have the chocolate-meets-mahogany complexion, the famously overdeveloped upper body, and an incredible bone structure; Rafa is willing to take risks. Willing to pose shirtless. Willing to be ogled at.

The images below are from the New York magazine and from the Lanvin Pour Homme Sport collection which will have Nadal endorsing his signature perfume.

I can recall a very funny story about the New York magazine photo. The pictures came out last august and screamed the title – Beefcake in the Backcourt. And to everyone’s surprise Rafa didn’t like them! The reason – he thought he looked too sexy!! Huh what? Now that’s a first!

I have to say I was particularly impressed with the Lanvin advertisement. Instead of putting him in a full suit and making him look dapper, they chose the simple unbuttoned white shirt, loose tie, and messy hair – all of which scream Rafa! Rugged yet stylish. Sophisticated yet careless.

And just when we thought he could only look one-dimensional, these two photos caught my eye and took me by complete surprise. The first was taken right before the Olympics and has Rafa sporting the colours of the Spanish football team and the second one appeared in the Le Officiele Magazine in 2007.

Who is that coy boy who is almost hesitant to look at the camera?

Surely not our “intense” Rafael Nadal

Who is this young man who looks calm, serene and almost angelic? Our tennis superstar or just a simple young man from sunny little Mallorca? Maybe he is both.

His style and obvious sex appeal notwithstanding, Rafael Nadal’s most attractive trait for me, is this contradiction that defines him.

The fact that he looks like a raging bull on court and like a harmless teenager off it. The fact that he still prefers having long meals with his family rather than rolling out of nightclubs. The fact that he is genuinely surprised when women swoon over him although the reasons are fairly obvious.

The fact that he can do an editorial shoot for Lanvin one day and still go fishing in Mallorca the next day. The fact that he is admirable and relatable at the same time. The fact that he is still thinks of himself as a “just a regular guy” although there is nothing “just regular” about him.

The fact that in an era when everyone wants to be a star, he wants to be a normal guy.

Rafael Nadal: Never Say Die!!!

Poulomee Basu — Sat, 16 May 2009 16:11:00 -0400

HOW DID HE DO IT AGAIN?

That’s the question which begs some answers.

In a nerve-wracking display of absolutely superb tennis, Novak Djokovic came second best to Rafael Nadal at the semi-finals in Madrid. Yet again.

But strange as it may sound, this time around it was Novak who deserved the victory. Not only did he play consistently aggressive tennis for over four hours; he matched Nadal’s mental toughness with a rare tenacity.

Gone was the Novak of the old who was plagued with accusations of complacency. Today’s Novak played every bit like the champion he always claims to be.

He had everything going for him in this match but yet again, it was a matter of so close yet so far.

Rafa had been looking a little off colour throughout the tournament. He was unsure about playing in Madrid and he didn’t leave his uncertainty behind when he came on court today.

In the first set, he was barely playing up to 50% of his capacity. The serve, the forehand, the backhand, the on court movement; everything was conspiring against him.

And the unforced errors were piling up. Perhaps it was a good thing that Djokovic put him out of his misery fairly quickly winning the set at 6-3.

I don’t know about everyone else, but whenever Rafa loses the first set I always think its going to be a three setter match. You just KNOW he is the immovable object, who won’t budge or buckle. If Novak was to beat him, he would have to do it, Rafa wasn’t going to help in anyway.

In quintessential Rafa style, he started to turn it around from the 10th game in the second set. And then he won a fairly comfortable tie breaker.

A scintillating third set followed and in a huge improvement from the last two weeks, the match remained competitive for the whole duration—all the four hours! There was no fading of Novak like I expected.

And what’s more the third set tiebreak was as nail biting an affair as I had ever seen. It had quit being a tennis match. It was a battle of blood, guts, sweat and endurance.

Although I m running out of superlatives for Nadal, I'm going to attempt this—how much heart did Rafa show out there today? He didn’t need to win another clay court masters title. He didn’t need to even show up. He had nothing to prove. After he had an injury scare in the second set, he didn’t need to finish the match and risk an aggravated injury so close to the Roland Garros.

And what did he do? Played like his life depended on it. Even after the first set when everyone sat shaking their heads in disbelief, he never stopped believing in himself. He had every possible problem a tennis player could have out there, but he simply never gave up.

Even though Rafa has displayed tremendous mental strength time and again, I am left spellbound every time he gets involved in such gladiatorial battles. This year, we have already seen him involved in four such matches—against Verdasco and Federer in Australia and against Djokovic in Rome and Madrid.

And what do we think every single time? “He cannot possible make that shot.” “ He cannot possible be fit for the next game.” “He cannot possibly get back into the game now.”

And evertyime we have been proved wrong. Rafael Nadal can. For the simple reason that he doesn’t believe that he will lose.

Make no mistake, with all my Nadal praise, I m taking nothing away from Novak Djokovic. Even though he might have been on the losing end, his progress on the surface has been nothing short of phenomenal.

To match Rafa physically and mentally for nearly four hours is nothing short of a mini victory for Novak, and certainly one that he should savour. There were no retirements or excuses this time around—just pure tennis.

A fearless performance like this right before the Roland Garros ought to do wonders for his confidence. Although I am sure he will be troubled with doubts about what does he have to do to actually WIN against Rafa on clay?

Maybe he has to try a couple of more times to finally understand how. But one thing is certain, he is much farther along to unlocking the mystery than anyone else.

Lesson from Rome: Djokovic Is the Biggest Threat to Nadal on Clay

Poulomee Basu — Sun, 03 May 2009 13:24:59 -0400

So what have we learnt from the Rome finals? Novak Djokovic has stepped up his game. Not only is he hitting the ball exceedingly well, he is fitter, more confident, and much more aggressive.

And yes, he IS shaping up to the tennis’s world’s hope to beat Rafael Nadal on clay this year.

This might have been incredulous to imagine a couple of months ago—Nole with his injuries, controversies and retirements seemed a ghost of his former self and nothing like the prodigy who won his first grand slam in 2007.

But he in almost a phoenix like manner has emerged from the ashes of the player who was lost in excuses.

How much heart did he show in the finals today? Running down every single ball, matching Rafa toe to toe during those long rallies and most importantly believing in himself when no one else really did.

But sadly it was not meant to be. Not only did Rafa play sensational tennis, he won points which he had no right to win. With shots which were more penetrating, generating more than the usual spin and with a fortune which favoured him when he needed it most; he produced two spectacular sets of tennis. Business as usual.

And that is exactly how special Rafael Nadal is on clay. You can play the clay court match of your life and still have nothing to show for it. You can play stunning four or five games, but will you be able to match his brilliance for over two hours? I don’t think so.

And whats more if you cannot play at his level for two hours in a masters series, what hope do you have of competing with his at a grand slam for over five hours?

And yet Novak has provided us with the slightest glimmer of hope today. if anyone can threaten Rafa’s reign on clay its our Djoker.

So will Novak be encouraged after today’s encounter? There are two ways to look at it. He could easily think that he played two sensational finals against Rafa and merely managed a set in the process.

Or he could think that he actually has the capability to agitate Nadal, to make him think, to make him take chances and maybe, just maybe, steal the match from him in one of these finals.

As for today’s finals, I think he did enough. Sure he had some unforced errors but let’s face it, he either could take his chances or be bulldozed by Nadal. He chose well. He fought and he fought hard. He got through a tough draw. He was just beaten by the better man.

I think the tennis world collectively will be in a conundrum after this final. They would not know whether to be encouraged or discouraged with this match. On one hand we finally have somebody who is ACTUALLY troubling Nadal on clay. An incredible progress! But on the other hand, the progress is being stunted every single time.

An ominous possibility looms large—how is anyone ever going to beat Rafael Nadal on clay?

Answers anyone?

Rafael Nadal's Appetite for Vengeance Fuels Defeat of Robin Soderling

Poulomee Basu — Fri, 01 May 2009 07:25:55 -0400

Anyone who witnessed Rafael Nadal annihilating Robin Soderling would agree that Rafa was out for vengeance yesterday.

For those who do not know, Rafa and Robin have a bit of bad blood between them. It all started at Wimbledon in 2007, when they had an epic five-setter. At the beginning of the final set, Soderling did something he should have never done—he took the "mickey" out of Nadal for picking his pants. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BwvgnYDTTQ0)

I think everyone will agree that Soderling was way out of line. Respect is a must in Rafa’s way of life, and by disrespecting him, on centre court as well, Soderling did not act wisely.

Yesterday was their first meeting since then. Soderling made a bright start by breaking Rafa in his very first service game. And how did Rafa respond? By winning 12 straight games! The final score was 6-1, 6-0.

If you are thinking that the match wasn’t competitive enough, let me tell you that you are grossly mistaken.

Soderling played absolutely lightning tennis for most of the match, but Rafael was special yesterday. If he is scary when he is form, he is positively ominous if he is out for revenge.

He tore Soderling’s heart out. It was classic Rafa—he ran everything down and made Soderling scamper from side to side continuously. There was never any doubt in the viewer's mind about who was going to win those gruelling rallies. Rafa didn’t even look close to missing.

By the end of the match he had produced a lethal display of spellbinding tennis.

What’s worse, he made sure that Soderling would think of this match and shudder. He would never be able to console himself by saying, "If I played a little better it could have been a different result." The truth is he couldn’t have played any better than he did, and still he managed to only win one game.

He had opportunities all right, but Nadal made sure he couldn’t capitalise on them. Not even once. No wonder Robin exited the stadium as soon as was humanly possible with the remaining dregs of his confidence and pride.

Rafa’s eyes shone with startling intensity last night. Not only did he look threatening, his focus and efficiency was almost eerie. I have never seen him play with this kind of purpose before. The destruction of Robin Soderling was completely merciless and almost sadistic.

The message was loud and clear; whatever you do, do not mess with me, or I will hunt you down and hand you the humiliation of a lifetime.

The Lament Of Loss

Poulomee Basu — Thu, 09 Apr 2009 06:53:25 -0400

Yesterday, I was in a strange frame of mind—looking at everything with grey coloured glasses.

I know everyone has those days when they feel melancholy. Feeling sad is one thing, but feeling defeated is quite another.

And then I decided to take a break and do some you-tubing. Now don’t ask me why, but I watched a few post match interviews—not of the winners but the losers.

Almost as soon as I started, I knew it was a bad idea.

Rafa was up first. After his match with Del Potro. The whole interview can be summed up in one word—bizarre.

Not only did he give some rather vague and convoluted answers, he went on to say he has personal reasons for his dismal performance in Miami. rafa giving excuses? surely not!

Fidgeting more than his usual amount and avoiding eye contact, he went on to call the match an amazing disaster. And surprise surprise, he almost insinuated that had Del Potro played to his best ability he would have been beaten much more easily!

Now, I have heard him after many loses but this one was quite different. His tone was not just sad.

I couldn’t place my finger on what it was. His humour seemed unusually self derisive—a quality I usually find so likable.

But there was nothing likable about that five minute video. He sounded like he ached inside. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tjg0afDUFiI )He sounded a little like me—defeated.

Next up was Roger, who seemed like a ghost of himself at his press conference. I advise Federer fans to never watch that video. Not only was he on the verge of tears the entire time, he said he is glad to move on to clay soon! (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qJc_UsOR3rs&feature=related)

I couldn’t help but wonder about Roger then. He is an enigma of late. i am not talking about his safin-inspired racket smashing in particular but i must say the man seems to be drained of all confidence.

At the end of the day I was heartbroken, and completely overwhelmed.

I know what people will say now: “to err is human and it’s only a masters series.”

To be honest, the fact that they were competing for a mere master’s title has never seemed more inconsequential.

And about them being humans—this is what I have been told ever since I was little. I understand it, but I don’t believe it.

Of course they are humans biologically, but they are not mere humans.

They are on this pedestal which most of us can only aspire to reach. I'm not saying this out of lack of self confidence, but I like to believe heroes are just that—Heroes.

Larger than life. Super human. Better and more empowered than mortals like us. They achieve everything they set their eyes on and personify beauty and confidence.

We can see them, enjoy them, hopefully get inspired by them, and try to embody the values they possess in abundance.

So how can they crumble like the rest of us?

Although the idea of a fallen hero is so romantic and tragic at the same time, this drama only spelled gloom for me.

Isn’t it incredible how sports can take you to extremities of emotion so effortlessly? We are euphoric one week and in the throes of desperation in the next.

And what’s strange is that I knew perfectly well I DIDN'T have to watch these videos, but that didn’t stop me.

It felt as much as a part of my karma as theirs. It almost felt like something I had to do to be part of their journey. To go through what they have been through.

If I have been part of the calm seas, I must be prepared for the storm.

But preparing yourself doesn’t make it any easier, does it?

When Tennis Married Fashion: Spotlight On Roger Federer

Poulomee Basu — Sun, 05 Apr 2009 14:53:59 -0400

There have been a flurry of Roger Federer articles lately and we all know why. There have also been numerous discussions and debates floated ranging from eloquent praises to near obituaries.

But today I want to talk about something else. I want to put all issues about his tennis on the back-burner and concentrate on something completely different—his personal style.

Ah Roger! On-court or off it, there is only one way to describe this man’s style—classic. A classic style is a look that lasts through the ages. It goes beyond trends and is often considered a triumph of art. No matter the decade, figure or fashion, classic styles are always a demonstration of truly refined taste. This perfectly describes Roger Federer for you, ladies and gentlemen!

The first picture is from a Rolex campaign in 2006 and the second one taken before Wimbledon in 2007:

First up is his on-court apparel. Federer has always stuck to truly classic pieces on court. No funky colors of loud prints for our man. His attire is always reminiscent of a posh garden-party! In past seasons of Wimbledon, he has strolled on to court in a jaunty blazer and long trousers. In 2008, it was a gentlemanly cardigan with "RF" monogram. Some people might call this a bit much and maybe it was. But, was it boring? Absolutely not. From a fashion point of view, Roger gets a ten out of ten.

Federer's style shows he's had coaching from the best. In 2008, he popped up on the front row of Marc Jacobs's fashion show, in New York, as the arm-candy of a clearly smitten Anna Wintour, editor of US Vogue. Asked that evening what sporting couture she favoured, Ms. Wintour gushed, "Anything that Roger wears." Right on, Anna. I guess it helps when you are good friends with Anna, not only are you en-vogue, you are also in Vogue. The following photos appeared in the Men’s Vogue in 2007.

Evidently in 2007, Federer found ample time to spend on his game as well as his wardrobe. As we can see from these pictures, he is waltzing around in Dolce and Gabbana. The body language, the stance, the relaxed feet, and the tidy suit all scream sophistication! And he somehow always has wind in his hair doesn’t he?

Classic fashion like Roger’s always starts with the simplest of ideas. Silhouettes are sleek and concepts are unpolluted. It is this clean thinking that allows a classic fashion to melt into any current theme or style. Following this principle, Roger tends to stick with classic colors as well as classic lines. Black, blue, white and brown are much more common in his wardrobe than bright yellow, hot pink and orange.

The common black tuxedo is another example of classic fashion. The traditional garment is used by men almost everywhere, and changes little from decade to decade. The pant, bow-tie, and a simple jacket combination creates a sleek elegance that needs no alteration to fit into any formal situation. Roger is often seen repeating the same silhouettes and styles over and over again, but guess what—with his classic looks and old world charm, it blends in perfectly. Fashion trends may come and go; but like everything else about him, Roger shines with his subtlety and effortless elegance.

With most stars or “celebrities”, you can chalk out their evolution of “dressing impeccably”. Not with Roger though. There are some people who get it right from day one. That’s Roger for you. Not only does he epitomise style, he epitomises panache. As a classic style doesn’t age very easily and this is why Roger always looks fashion forward. Here we have Roger on the red carpet, once in 2005 and once in 2009. - He was incredible then and remains so now.

Everyone knows that in the world of fashion, confidence is your biggest asset. It can literally make or break your look. You can wear haute couture but if you don’t have confidence, you will be little more than a clothes hanger.

This is one area where Roger does exceedingly well. What’s more attractive than Roger Federer? It’s the aura of Roger Federer. Every time he steps out in public, he oozes confidence and charisma, which has an almost magnetic effect on fans the world over. Whether it’s posing with a chopper, or sashaying on the red carpet, he knows he is tennis royalty and dresses the part impeccably.

We give RF a 10/10 for looking uber stylish and beyond sensational, every single time!

When Tennis Married Fashion, Part One : The Evolution

Poulomee Basu — Tue, 31 Mar 2009 08:34:56 -0400

As the Miami masters gets into the more competitive mode, I realise we all need to recharge our batteries with something off the beaten track.

So an exercise in vanity is coming right up!

To call a spade a spade—we all know that tennis stars today, both male and female, are some of the most sought-after athletes in the world.

They are young, flamboyant and extremely desirable.

And thanks to new promotional campaigns and marketing strategies, they seem to be everywhere these days.

Tennis has married fashion—and how. From magazine covers to editorial photo-shoots, tennis stars are literally the new eye candies.

But it always wasn’t like this. Fashion in tennis has emerged slowly but surely, although the journey has been far from smooth.

With this compilation I will trace (or attempt to trace) a few things. The first part will briefly trace the evolution of fashion in men's tennis. The second part would attempt to deconstruct the signature styles of some of our favourite tennis players by looking at some of their most edgy and fashion-forward photos—both on and off court.

An indulgent exercise it might be—but for a few moments it will take our minds off the who is better and who is worse debate, and see them in a new light maybe?

I am tackling men’s tennis first, as I feel more comfortable with it. However if I manage to handle it well, I might do a similar exercise for our lovely ladies.

So enjoy!

Speaking about the evolution of fashion in men’s tennis; the phenomenon can be clearly divided into five stages.

1500-1900: Did you know that the earliest male tennis players most closely resembled today’s baseball players? Royal decree ensured that all players wore balloon-like shorts!! And they were accompanied by stockings!

However, as the Victorian era emerged, men’s tennis apparel became more conservative. Tennis players took to the courts in full-length trousers and shirts. There was some relief on the footwear front though, when rubber-soled sneakers were introduced to the men’s game in 1867.

1900-1932 During these decades, men dressed in white flannel trousers and white shirts, sometimes adding v-neck or cable-knit sweaters to their kit to add an element of style. This made them virtually indistinguishable from test cricket players.

‘Big’ Bill Tilden emerged as the first male tennis fashion icon, transforming the image of men’s tennis from that of a sport played by wealthy, leisured men, into a man’s game played by the toughest athletes.

Naturally, his style was emulated by many—the long shirts rolled up to the elbows, the customary flannel trousers and a selection of elegant sweaters became all the rage.

1932-1970: A major revolution took place in men’s tennis in 1932. English tennis player Henry ‘Bunny’ Austin, grew frustrated with having to wear cumbersome flannel trousers, and ditched these in favour of a pair of shorts. When Austin wore his shorts at Wimbledon in 1932, he initiated a fashion revolution that transformed the face of the sport forever.

During the next four decades changes to men’s tennis fashion were minor. The length of shorts varied from decade to decade, as did the cut of the tennis shirts players wore during tennis tournaments.

1970-1990: It was not until 1970 that players decided to add a little colour to the game. The change was introduced after spectators complained that the bland colouring made it difficult to distinguish between players. Even after colour made an appearance in men’s shirts, it remained toned-down, with most using only pastel hues.

At around this time the use of headbands became popular, with both John McEnroe and Bjorn Borg sporting this headgear during the period of their famous rivalry.

1990-present: From the '90s onwards, colours started taking up more space in men’s shirts—first in the form of designs, and then fully coloured shirts finally became an acceptable item of clothing for male players.

Shorts were soon to follow, with the likes of Andre Agassi pushing the boundaries of men’s tennis fashion ever further with denim shorts!

During the 1990s, the short-shorts favoured during the 1980s were dropped in favour of baggier, Bermuda style shorts. Players like Agassi started wearing lycra cycling shorts underneath these shorts.

As the shape of shorts changed, so did that of shirts, with some players discarding the traditional tennis shirt entirely.

Tennis today is at its fashionable best. Male players now choose from a wide variety of shirt styles, ranging from t-shirts to sleeveless shirts to polo shirts. A riot of colours on the shoes, the wristbands, and the headbands is also on display. Image truly is everything and experimentation with on-court apparel is in full swing.

However, the tennis stars today aren't only satiated by looking good on the court—they want to look impeccable off-court too. They are fashion savvy and want to put their best foot forward, irrespective of the occasion. Which brings me to the next part of my discussion—personal style.

Everyone has it, but not everyone can flaunt it! In my next post I would be deconstructing the signature style of none other than Roger Federer.

Stay tuned!

source: http://clay-court-tennis.com/history-of-mens-tennis-fashions/

Novak Djokovic and Cristiano Ronaldo's Uncanny Resemblance

Poulomee Basu — Wed, 18 Mar 2009 07:32:24 -0400

I don’t know why but Novak Djokovic has always reminded me of Cristiano Ronaldo and vice versa. Being an absolute tennis and football buff, I have followed both of them over their careers; but more I think about them, the more apparent their similarities become.

First and foremost, I think there are some athletes we love to hate; some who make us queasy about how to perceive them. Their personalities are rather similar too don’t you think?

There are plenty of people who swear by Ronaldo’s spectacularly quick feet and his prodigious talent. They call him flashy, talented, young and exciting. Isn’t that how we all describe the Djoker?

Secondly, both of them have a habit of polarising the fans and media, and being in news for all the wrong reasons.

Half the population wants to smear them on their toast every morning, while the others start dry retching at the very mention of their name. (www.timesonline.co.uk)

Talented they might be, but chants of “cheat”, “bluffer” and “drama queen” often drown the cheer they earn for their skill.

Both of them are also rather notorious for taking shortcuts. We all know Ronaldo’s reputation for ‘going down quicker than a $20 hooker’ was not earned lightly, as lots of YouTube compilation show.

I agree he does extract a lot of fouls from his opponents but you cannot deny that he REALLY does dive an awful lot.

In the 2004 Olympics, the man could have won a medal on the Olympic diving team just as easily as he did for playing soccer!

And then there is Djokovic. He might not be diving, but his extended medical timeouts, exaggerated excuses and lack of a killer instinct has been evident more than once – all of which point towards him not giving a 100 percent at crucial times.

Next up is their tendency to fake injuries. At this point the similarities between them become scary. We constantly hear about Ronaldo and his injuries; when most of the times they are just sore muscles which he leverages to get a few days off from practice.

Novak on the other hand has had almost every other “illness” he can possibly get. From breathing woes, to chest pains to heat cramps—he has had it all. And used it time and again to withdraw from key matches at grand slams.

Both Djokovic and Ronaldo also share a key personality trait – a certain cockiness which is more of a disadvantage to them than a merit.

Who can forget the incident when Ronaldo famously agreed with the FIFA president Sepp Blatter who described him as a ‘modern day slave’?

Excuse me Mr. Ronaldo, show me a slave who earns the amount of moolah like you, works for 90 minutes per week and resides in a mansion whose lavatory is bigger than most normal folks’ entire houses, and I’ll buy whatever you have to say! (www.timesonline.co.uk)

And then there is Nole.

Cockiness, arrogance and outrageous comments are fast becoming his second nature. In the US Open, he called Roddick "not a nice person" after beating the home boy convincingly. All this coming from you Nole? Someone who was everyone's darling by mimicking people endlessly merely a year ago?

These two athletes also have an unusual similarity—an ability to have love affairs with dreams. Ronaldo dreamt for the longest possible time to play for Real Madrid—something which probably every southern European footballer seeks to do some day.

Ronaldo and Real Madrid’s ‘will they/won’t they’ saga carried on for two and a half years and he and the Real president Ramon Calderon are still making eyes across the Channel at each other, all the while pretending that nothing is going on.

Djokovic had a different dream. A dream to be the best tennis player on the planet. Now by all means he should have that dream.

But then do we really see him pursuing it? No. Rather we constantly see him complaining about the attention showered on Federer and Nadal. He complains that he is often ignored.

‘I am a Grand Slam champion’ he demands; failing to understand that being a Grand Slam champion means displaying consistency and integrity, and above all a fighting spirit—when all your chips are down.

And lastly both of these players have a rather peculiar similarity of triggering off hate campaigns like no-one else.

If you do a random Google search of their names—innumerable hate clubs pop up. Ronaldo’s detractors reached an all time high after he head butted Rooney, egged on the referee, and then winked after Rooney was red carded.

He did all of this in a single match and to someone he considers a friend. The death threats from devastated England fans, fuelled by 40 years of hurt and an inherent distrust of flashy foreigners, were already in the post before Jamie Carragher had even missed the decisive penalty.(http://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/football/2009/01/13/cristiano-ronaldo-why-he-s-the-player-we-love-to-hate-and-hate-to-love-115875-21038579/)

Although Novak has not done anything as dramatic, his cringe worthy impressions, his perpetual smart talk with the press and those embarrassing retirements have definitely triggered off a wave of hate and mistrust against him.

To add insult to injury, his family are a continuous source of negative press; making the situation really tricky. While Nadal and Federer are admired by all, what can we say about nole and his fans?

Although Ronaldo and Djokovic have so many similarities, there is a very important difference between them.

All that criticism notwithstanding, Cristiano Ronaldo delivers on that football pitch. And he has done that time and again, tasting the highest accolades a footballer can aspire for in the process.

Nole however has yet to reach his full potential. Although he he still young, I would hate it if he becomes another one of those players who had talent aplenty but lacked the winning attitude.

Rhetoric From Rotterdam

Poulomee Basu — Mon, 16 Feb 2009 16:49:00 -0500

I watched the World Tennis Championships in Rotterdam the day before yesterday in absolute frustration. Let me say up front, Andy Muray deserved his victory and was clearly the superior player. But my frustration had different reasons. And yes, as usual they were manifold.

Firstly, it was an untidy tennis match with both the players playing well below par and littering the game with errors. I always get frustrated with a game that has no rhythm.

Secondly, the near fawning of the British media over Andy was nauseating. Forgive me, but I was under the impression that sports commentators are supposed to be “relatively” unbiased.

Yet the whole of this week, in EVERY single match, all they spoke about is Andy. I agree he is British and we need to speak about him, but surely we need to focus on the players actually PLAYING!

And surely they should not berate other players. This is a classic one I heard after Rafa’s win over Monfils in the SF, “well his knees have got to give way some day…although he can easily win 10 more French Opens…but you know (with a big smile) maybe this is the year Rafa will pick up an injury..” (Followed by hahahahaha)

Who speaks like this? Not only is it irresponsible, it’s completely unethical. Of course it's your job to dissect every player, but this kind of commentary can be best described as a pointless discussion between two juveniles over a few pints in the local pub.

Which brings me to Nadal and his injury. I read lots of stuff yesterday about how he used his injury as an excuse.

Well I am no expert but I could clearly see him suffer a lot of pain in that match. We all know he is professional enough to not feign nor exaggerate his injuries. He was clearly under the weather yesterday, but he still fought.

I have seen him taking quite a few nasty beatings, but I have yet to see a gutless performance from him. He could have easily taken the preferred route of retiring from the match but he didn’t do so out of respect for Andy.

And his presser and website all said the same thing. “Andy was better and he beat me, I don’t want to make any excuses about my condition. I don’t want to steal his thunder.” And yet I am sure more backlash will follow him.

And apart from all these issues, something much bigger was bothering me this whole week, but I couldn’t place my finger on it. And then it hit me. I “YouTube-ed” Rafa’s post-match interview after his semi-final loss in the US Open last year.

There he was, saying, “if you have to be in top positions you would have to play a lot of tournaments, I am only playing the ones I HAVE to play. It’s the tennis calendar which needs to adjust…”

So what the hell was he doing playing in Rotterdam in the first place? And that’s not all. He is also playing in Dubai in a week along with Roger Federer.

How do you persuade top players to play in Dubai and Rotterdam? Let’s look at some of the other options.

Preparation for a grand slam: Clearly not. This may hold true for an event like Queens, but not in this case.

Points: The tournaments (both Rotterdam and Dubai) are for 500 points (which are awarded to the winner), and Nadal and Federer are quite comfortably ahead (at the moment). This explanation thus seems somewhat inadequate.

Fondness: Nadal said in his Rotterdam presser that he wants to give his fans a treat and make up for his dismal performance in the last year’s tournament.

Ask Federer and he has always said he loves playing in Dubai. Although, this is not a concrete explanation, I CAN believe it (more or less).

Keeping up the momentum: The US Masters series is more than a month away. I agree match practice and momentum are important, especially for a player like Rafa. But didn’t he just win a gruelling major less than a week ago? He surely didn’t need to be back on the courts (and that, too a faster one) within a week. But hey what do we know.

Breather in the tennis calendar: Yes, it is a breather all right, but isn’t Nadal always complaining about the jam-packed calendar? Isn’t he the first one to talk about how devastating it is for the players to be fit and a 100% in such hard courts tournaments? And yet he played.

Improving the game: Well that’s the only explanation that I CAN believe. And this explains Rafa’s entering the singles as well as doubles events. To improve his game and particularly the net play.

Yet one can’t overlook the fact that he knew the faster courts of Rotterdam are likely to do more damage than good for his “not properly rested” body.

So what are they really playing for? I am forced to look for my answer in the only obvious other place. Appearance Fees.

A web search describes it as an extra sum of money a player makes for showing up at a tournament. I have no problems with players getting paid what they deserve. Tiger Woods get around 3 million dollas just to show up in a tournament, so why not our game's elite?

My issue is somewhat different.

Motivation. Since it's somewhat unclear as so what these players are actually playing for, it's difficult to understand how they motivate themselves for such tournaments.

I am not insinuating that they lose on purpose but are they still 100 percent motivated and charged to deliver their best? I want to say YES. But the truth is, I don’t know.

So how will these players, particularly Rafael Nadal find a balance? If he keeps playing such events, he will surely be brunt out at the US Open much like the last year.

So am I actually drawing a conclusion that there is a motivating factor so huge in Rafa’s decision to play in these mini-tournaments that he is willing to overlook the fact that he might exhaust himself?

When he clearly knows how important it is to stay fresh for a full 11 months of the tour?

And now he is injured. He has nobody to blame but himself.

Call it my naivete, but I would still like to believe that players of such calibre are actually playing the tournaments purely for their love of the sport. Don’t get me wrong.

I m not suggesting that our beloved players are cold, calculating, money spinning machines. Surely they love what they do, and it helps that it pays millions.

But my point is that as economics becomes more relevant in contemporary tennis, things are getting more nebulous. More so is the skewed distribution of money in tennis.

It's one of the more popular sports in the world and yet the top players are making millions just to show up, their performance notwithstanding, while many of those ranked 150-200 are struggling to make money.

But we cannot deny the fact that many smaller tournaments will never find the resources to attract the top players.

I'm pretty sure that tennis would benefit a lot more if Nadal and Federer were to play in less developed cities. It is more than likely to get more people interested in the sport. I hate it when sport marries big time money even though I understand that in today’s world even if God wanted to come down to planet earth, he would want to be marketable.

Lastly, I want to say that I didn’t write this article to accuse anybody of reckless money making, but merely as an attempt to be objective.

Maybe these tournaments are just a healthy mix of good match practice with loads of cash. But something tells me it’s not that straightforward.

I don’t know what conclusions to draw. Maybe there are none to begin with. Does all this money talk take away something from the game?

I don’t know myself. And how does all this money talk make me feel about my heroes. Well right now, uncomfortable. Does it lower them in my eyes a little bit? I'm yet to make up my mind about that.

The Legend of Two Supermen: Roger Federer and Rafael Nadal

Poulomee Basu — Wed, 11 Feb 2009 15:53:26 -0500

I read Rob's excellent article yesterday (http://bleacherreport.com/articles/119382-atp-nadal-tests-positive-for-kryptonite-spoof) and i thought i will write some good old fashioned roger vs rafa stuff. This might be the millionth piece you read about them, but since I wrote it, I might as well share it with you all.

I must admit that before yesterday I was not completely aware of how the larger majority (and particularly tennis folk) perceives Rafa. Today i have realised that a lot of people often look at him like the "bad guy in tennis"—the guy who "spoils" Roger Federer's party every single time.

They always acknowledge his talent, yes, but most of the post-match obituaries take the tone of what “Nadal took from Federer” rather than Nadal’s skill in the first place.

I can see where they are coming from. It was Nadal who stopped Rog when he wanted to win a record 6th Wimbledon. It was Nadal who has stood in Rog's way every single time he has been close to winning his dream—the French open. It was Nadal again who stopped him winning his 14th grand slam on that fateful Sunday.

And if you think about it—essentially what has Federer taken away from Nadal? Nothing. Except those two Wimbledons. I dare say the first time I don't think Rafa was ready to win it. But yes, it must've hurt him the second time. But the loss wasn't as ego-shattering as Rog's in 2008.

Lets look at the OZ final for instance. That final was our opportunity to savour the greatest rivalry in contemporary sport. And boy did it live up to its expectations. It celebrated the exquisite contrast in their styles and temperaments all over again. It raised the level of tennis so high that we were left shaking our heads in disbelief instead of merely clapping.

In fact, the Times even went on to say that "Somewhere along the way on Sunday we discovered the true meaning of this rivalry. The two men asked questions of each other that they never imagined they would have to answer on a tennis court."

However even after this spectacular display of tennis—we are still not talking about Rafa are we? More people are shedding tears over Roger than applaud rafa.

Let me get one thing straight—I have nothing against Roger Federer. I love him. In all honesty I love players who show emotion. I would rather not have this “calm and composed” veneer at all. Its their vulnerability which makes them relatable.

Him breaking down might have been heartbreaking and all but when does Nadal get the praise he deserves? When do we focus on him and his talent rather than compare him nonstop to the mighty Fed?

People constanly find his game less aesthetically pleasing. They question his respect for Federer as well as his humility. They even call him less talented. They even call him Kryptonite.

To quote Tennis.com (as I cannot find words that better describe this):

"Its high time we give Rafa the credit he is due. With wins at Wimbledon and the Olympics, Rafael Nadal has long shed his “clay-court specialist” moniker. The game that was moulded on clay is now good enough on any surface. Earthy yet cerebral. Practiced yet constantly evolving. Now, at the age of 22, Nadal completes his long journey to the top of men's professional tennis with a freshly minted Olympic gold medal hanging around his neck. After sitting behind Federer for a record 160 consecutive weeks -Nadal has been No. 2 longer than it took him to reach that spot from No. 466 - he is finally No. 1 in the ATP rankings.

"At the core of it, he has the greatest weapon in the game -- that's his heart. “His heart, dictates how good his focus is on a day-to-day, point-to-point basis."(www.atptennis.com) His success is a true testament to something beyond talent. It is the power of courage, hard work, belief, discipline and determination. It’s working against the tide and never giving up.

Nadal is a living testimony to the fact that there is nothing in the world that we cannot achieve if we put our hearts and minds to it.

Today Nadal needs to be appreciated and not just because he won Wimbledon; he deserves to be applauded as he truly derserves it, Period. He aint the kryptonite anymore. He is a superman in his own right"

Oz Open Final: A Night Of Agony, Ecstasy and More...

Poulomee Basu — Tue, 10 Feb 2009 05:43:13 -0500

Well as this is my first post I'm hoping to put up a little disclaimer. I am hardly a writer and go backwards and forwards a lot. Hopefully, I will make my point and learn loads from all the feedback.

Well, Rafael Nadal won the Australian Open and how! :) He writes in his blog that this is one of the victories that he felt most peaceful with. Well, I guess he is getting used to winning that’s all!

On a more sombre note, he ripped Roger Federer’s heart out again. On paper this is the best chance Federer could have had of beating Nadal in a grand slam final.

In an awesome display of tactics, strength, guts and tenacity, he emerged victorious at the end of four and a half hours of scintillating tennis. It is unimaginable how someone could play a match like he did against Verdasco and come back and do it again in less than 48 hours. Talk about players having heart. Rafa wears it on his sleeve.

The night of agony and ecstasy wouldn’t be complete without mentioning the mighty Fed. He might say his serve let him down, but in reality his mind let him down. Yet again. I think whenever Fed faces history books these days, he falters. He doesn’t step up to the match, but Rafa always does. He broke Federer’s heart that night, and Federer couldn’t stop the tears. Or find his composure.

And how classy was Rafa in going up to him, giving him a hug and asking if he was alright to speak again?

In fact his lower lip was trembling too when Federer welled up again.

In a gesture of supreme sportsmanship, Rafa wasn’t even exuberant with his celebration, holding the trophy aloft for a fleeing moment only. And then “Rog, sorry for today,” said Nadal, turning to his friend with genuine compassion in his voice. “I really know how you feel right now. Remember that you are a great champion and you are one of the best in history and you will beat Pete Sampras’ 14 titles for sure”.

Is this the greatest rivalry in sport today? I don't think anybody can have those doubts anymore.

When was the last time we saw a poignant gesture like this on a presentation ceremony of a competitive sport? I have never seen it.

Tennis is in good hands. There is no big four, it is essentially the big two, and they are head and shoulders above the rest.

And coming back to Rafa briefly, I cannot describe in words how much pride I felt in supporting him. And needless to say I want to congratulate him for this superb display of talent and tenacity over the past few weeks!

I know he is utterly humble but I'm going to take a step forward and dedicate this victory of his to all those critics who said he was a “mere flash in the pan” when he burst on the scene four years ago; to all the people who called him a “clay court moniker” and spoke of him like a mere “martial player” who was a nobody when compared to the god that was Federer.

This is dedicated to all those who thought his game is not the way tennis is “supposed to be played”. There is no correct way of playing a sport. There can never be.

Today the “clay court specialist” has defied these rules and stereotypes, all over again.

This is a resounding victory which screams that not only is he the king of clay, but he has pushed himself out of his comfort zone to transform his game to be lethal on any surface.

He has won majors in all three major surfaces (equalling only three previous players) and is raring to take tennis to the next level. It might not be Federer-esque, elegant and balletic, but it will be tennis all right. And it will be beautiful.