Epic vs. Epic: The Better Matchup Gives the Edge to Wimbledon's 2008 Finals

The most prestigious of all Slams is over, and it has left the fans and professionals alike spellbound with yet another nerve-wracking final.

Debates are rife as to whether the last year's Classic has been surpassed and outclassed. Generally, these debates have to do with preferences, personal tastes, and points of view.

Your personal preferences and such, go a long way in deciding what you like better. The problem with attempting an objective analysis is that, the acceptance/non-acceptance of the axioms of objective reasoning is subjective, though once accepted, it is possible to nail down one of these as the better.

Here, below, is attempted, not so much an analysis, as a lining up of opinions in favor of the Federer vs. Nadal final of Wimbledon 2008, as the better of the two finals—the 2008 edition and the 2009 edition. The writer makes no claims as to what he presents below being a true, absolute and final word on the subject.

The argument is presented with a score-line similar to a game of tennis. The first field in the score represents the 2008 finals.

(The side of Wimbledon 2009 finals is presented by Rajat Jain; you can read it here.)

15-0; The Significance

The anticipation going into the match was really big. When an event is hyped up, but doesn't live up to it, it is a flop. But when it surpasses it, it is more than simply success—it is immortal.

This match was where the question of whether Federer would have to step down from his seemingly eternal perch at the top of the rankings-tree, would be answered—if his grip on his favorite Slam is loosened, it would only be a matter of time before his grip on the rankings would be jerked away by that bull of a man.

His opponent being Nadal, their previous encounter at the same venue already rated a classic, and the improvement Nadal had made over the year, it promised to be a classic encounter, the repercussions adding weight to the expectations, and the tension.

Not many a man will disagree that the match surpassed the expectations, and that the Tennis Landscape saw a sea-change after this classic encounter.

Perhaps the 2009 finals would have had some significance if Roddick had won. But almost everyone had written him off, and the only significance this match held for the world was Federer's 15th Grand Slam title.

Though it is perhaps the most important record in Tennis today, by no means was this match touted the only one where it could be achieved.

Looking back, a Roddick win would have changed perceptions. It would have added a fifth player to Tennis' top four. But it seems very less likely that Federer and Nadal would not be the favourites in any of the coming tournaments, because of a Roddick win.

30-0; The Drama

This is where the roof and good weather lose out!

Not only was the score-line dancing this way and that, but also, the rain delays at important moments, and importantly, one of which caused a momentum shift without which the match may not have lasted as much as it did, made spectators eat their fingers off in the tension.

Needless to say, the length of each point (notwithstanding certain routines at the baseline) was insanely high. 'Til the last moment, one could not really say who would win the point.

"What if Rafa was pushed out of the court into the stands? He could come back running and hit a stupendous passing shot."

Not only was the match in totality a nail-biter, but also, each point was as staggering in itself. It was a drama of the highest quality in parts and in whole.

40-0; The Level of the Play

Two best base-liners of all time, in arguably the best form of their life (of course, some fans will debate the Federer was not at his best for a set and half or so, which is why it is "arguably"), this match could be rated as the best base-line shot-making of all time.

Not that it did not have net-play—there were plenty of them, but mostly from one side of the court, and on many of those occasions, the forays to the net were nullified with superior base-line play.

Neither player was in self-doubt, except perhaps when Nadal was serving for the championship in the fourth set. It may not be an exaggeration to claim that, in every rally there were multiple shots that skidded off the lines.

Stupendous angles were created off both flanks. Both men were forced beyond the tramlines on uncountable occasions. When the angle was missing, the shots had depth and spin, and invariably landed on the base-line.

Each point was constructed in intricate and painful ways. At no point of time could anyone be sure of the point, because winners and passing shots could spring from hitherto unexplored regions of the court.

The level of play was accentuated by Federer's forays to the net after working his way forward on the back of innumerable approach shots, where either he would execute a difficult volley off a viciously top-spinning forehand, or would be passed with immaculate and unbelievable passing-shots.

In comparison, the final of 2009, though a better execution of grass-court tennis, is difficult to rank among the best of grass-Court matches. Perhaps it is up there in the number of aces. But grass Court Tennis is as much about aces as it is of approach shots, and volleys (especially drop volleys off pacy ground-strokes).

Perhaps, this is because, this era is not the era of grass-court tennis and its players are by no means the best practitioners of it. It might give feelings of nostalgia and freshness, but '08 wins hands down in level of play.

40-15; Not a Good Grass-Game

There maybe better and more effective ways to play on grass, like in the 2009 Finals. What happened was perhaps that Nadal who lacked the weapons to play the game that way, nevertheless had enough brute-force, base-line game, and serving strategy (if not the serve) to prevent the other man from executing his.

That the game was a great entertainer does not stand in for it not being played in the most effective way on the particular surface under question.

In comparison, in the 2009 finals, the players employed more of those weapons which let you play with lesser physical effort on grass, with shorter points.

40-30; The Numbers Are Not as Flattering

The Scorelines look like this:

Wimbledon '09 : 7-5, 6-7 (6), 6-7 (5), 6-3, 14-16

Wimbledon '08 : 6-4, 6-4, 7-6 (5), 7-6 (8), 9-7

There were two tie-breakers and three residual breaks of serve in both matches. But on account of the last set scores, the '09 Wimbledon has better numbers of the two. 14-16 is really an unbelievable score-line and it makes this year's final look like a best-of-seven match.

Also, the total points won and unforced errors are better for this year's final. Roddick and Federer won, combined, a total of 436 points, while Nadal and Federer had a lesser number: 413.

Unforced Errors were better too for this year's finals at 71 compared to 79 for last year.

Concluding Remarks

Both finals are classics and rank among the best matches of all time. But the point of view presented here gives a slight edge to the 2008 Finals.

In the end it could be said that neither wins the game, but one has the edge.

---

Thanks to Rajat for sharing many ideas with me, and giving me the opportunity to write this with him.