Rafael Nadal or Roger Federer in 2009?

Four and a half years of absolute dominance, and suddenly the dominant finds himself dominated. A new No. 1 ranked player has emerged.

This, perhaps, might be a case of "old wine in new bottle," but somehow it doesn't sound right [at least for me, it doesn't].

I've been wondering and pondering since August 18th 2008. Will Nadal be able to extend his reign and supremacy the way Federer did?

There is no doubt about the fact that Nadal is a very gifted player [I'll admit it, although a bit grudgingly], but will the clay court champion dominate all four grand slams in the years to come?

It would be unfair to compare Nadal and Federer with each other as both of them are class acts in their own right, but somehow my thoughts always seem to be doing that.

The way Federer used to breeze past his opponents makes me wonder "Will Nadal be able to do this?" Is making such a comparison wrong? Or will such comparisons be continued to be made?

2008 saw an altogether different Nadal and Federer. While Nadal was stubborn enough to convert his past failures into successes, Federer recovered from mononucleosis but not enough though, to convert his finals into victories [although he silenced his critics by winning his fifth consecutive US open championship].

So will 2009 rejuvenate the five-time Wimbledon champion enough that he strikes back with vigor, or will Nadal take his stubborn streak to a next level?

Or, adding a twist to the tale, will Djokovic and Murray decide to give these guys a run for their money?

Whatever the case might be, 2009 will be an interesting year.

One will be be attempting to equal a world record and possibly create a new one, while the other, I guess, will be looking forward to add more grand slams to his kitty.