Roger Federer: What Has Got His GOAT?

Ok, I’m going to admit that half the reason I chose to write this article is purely because I thought of this fabulous (in my opinion) title!

Of course, all you tennis fans out there will be extremely familiar with the term "G.O.A.T."

For those who are not such avid fans, let me enlighten you: G.O.A.T. stands for Greatest Of All Time.

Now, just so you know, I’m not going to get into one of those long-winded debates about the G.O.A.T. As many have noted (and as I believe to be true), that determination depends how you define the term "greatest."

Is it the player who possesses the greatest technique (Roger Federer) or the one with the highest number of Grand Slams (Pete Sampras)?

Or perhaps it should be the player who can win on all surfaces (Andre Agassi or, more recently, Raphael Nadal) or the one who achieves a calendar slam (Rod Laver, twice)?

Some believe the greatest player is the one who spends the most time at the top of the world rankings (but should that be judged consecutively, giving the nod to Federer, or in total, awarding it to Sampras?)

As you can see, there are just too many things to take into consideration. Not to mention that the game has changed from era to era...so I’m going to leave it up to you, the reader, to decide.

What I really want to talk about is what's got Federer's goat. After all, I haven’t written about Federer for well over a week and am starting to get withdrawal symptoms!

It's easy to apply this well-known phrase to Roger.

At the end of 2007, it looked like he was not only going to equal Sampras’ impressive record of 14 Grand Slam titles, but surpass it too.

And...dare I say it? It looked like he might do it with some ease.

Then 2008 started and, well, we all know what how it turned out: not as great as 2007. Getting to one semifinal and three finals at Grand Slam level (and winning one of them) would have been an awesome achievement for any other player. But the press was already starting to ask whether the "Federer Era" was coming to an end.

As a massive Federer fan, I thought this was hugely unfair. After all, the guy had made it to nearly all the major finals (and he was ill in Australia, so getting to the semis there was pretty impressive).

He had been No. 1 in the world for a record four years. So what if he doesn’t win everything?

Even Federer has admitted that he has created a bit of a "monster" for himself. Seems like if he doesn’t win a match, everyone is asking him what's "wrong." Give the guy a break!

I thought to myself, "Federer will come back strong and prove all those doubters wrong in 2009!" After all, he had finished off 2008 so nicely, winning his fifth consecutive U.S. Open. Another day and another new record for the Swiss master.

And so this year has come, and it hasn't been bad by any means. Of course, he has not played a whole lot, but getting to another Grand Slam final and the semis of a Masters event is definitely not shabby.

However, I’m not entirely convinced that he's proven the doubters wrong, as I had hoped he would. In fact, he is starting to make me nervous. Every time he comes across a player of some quality (or heck, even of "lower" quality), I start to worry that he won’t come through. This is an entirely new experience for me, as I’m sure it is for many Federer fans.

As we have all seen, something has got his goat. And I think that something is two players: Raphael Nadal and Andy Murray.

I really started thinking about this after his loss to Murray in the Indian Wells semis. It was his fourth straight loss to Murray. I am not taking anything away from Murray, he has improved a great deal (and as a Brit, he has my entire support when he is not playing Federer).

No, it wasn't the opponent, it was the way in which Federer lost.

Even Roger admitted after the match that he played a shocking final set. To me, it looked like a repeat of the fifth set in this year’s Australian Open final. Just like in Oz, the momentum had been entirely with Federer going into the final set of the match. Then, just like in Oz, Federer appeared to collapse. Errors were coming left, right and center.

The serve, which used to get him out of many tight spots, was not holding up. Backhands were going long or netting. 

And talking of the backhand, just like Nadal had done in Australia, Murray was playing the majority of shots to Federer’s backhand. These guys have him sussed.

Murray even admitted as much before the match had even started, saying that he knew exactly how he was going to play him. Surely, then, Federer could have expected what was going to happen?

What is making me nervous is that I think even Federer does not have that self-belief anymore. Otherwise, I cannot really account for his crumbling in such a fashion against Murray (and Nadal in Oz).

Federer may wish to blame it on age, but what he said after the loss to Murray did not make much sense to me. First, he said that fitness had a part to play in the result, saying "I’m old. He’s young."

But then went on to say that he does not feel the "age factor."

Hmm...I’m not buying it. After all, he has an excellent Grand Slam record, and those are best of five. Best of three can hardly be more tiring physically than a best-of-five match, right? Ok, he’s 27 and Murray’s 21, but it’s not like Roger’s over the hill or anything like that.

So what can he do?

Well, there has been much talk of getting a coach (before and after that failed try-out with Darren Cahill). After all, the top players have sussed out his game, he needs to fully suss theirs.

Also, a little work on the backhand couldn’t do any harm, surely? Even he appears to be aware of this, admitting after his match with Murray that he has been struggling with his backhand of late.

But I think there is something more than that. Although there is the argument that Federer is concentrating on Slams and that the Masters results do not bother him so much, I again don't buy it.

No player, surely, goes into a match without much caring whether they win or lose; especially not someone who has won 13 Grand Slams. That’s not the kind of mentality that makes a winner.

No, what I think he needs to do is regain some of his belief.

Here he could take a few tips off Rafa. The guy never gives up; he always manages to find a way to win. That is why he is the best in the world. Just think of his recent match against David Nalbandian: Rafa saved a whopping five match points and went on to win the match by taking the last set 6-0. A mighty comeback if ever I saw one (although I didn’t actually see the match, as it was on at 4 a.m. here in the UK)!

Some may think that Federer is past his peak and on his way out. I accept that old players will decline as new players emerge and make their way up the rankings. But for me, some of the fine tennis Federer displayed during the second set of his semifinal match against Murray proved that he can still turn it on when he wants to. It just might take a bit more effort than it used to, that’s all.

If he wants that 14th Slam title, he sure is going to have to work as hard as ever for it. But I’m sure he can do it.

In my eyes, he is one of the finest players (if not the finest player) to have ever graced the good game of tennis. Some argue that he cannot be the greatest if there are some players in his era that he just cannot beat.

But to me, all that's needed to solidify his status is to come back fighting. You win some, you lose some, but Roger, it is time to show these guys who is boss.

Don’t let them get your GOAT!

P.S. Even if he doesn’t get Grand Slam No. 14 (which I pray he does!), Federer will still be the greatest to me. There is no other player who I have ever enjoyed watching play as much as I enjoy watching the "FedExpress". That makes him the greatest to me! Ok, soppiness over.