Tiger at 75. Are we still spoiled?

I will not deny that I am as big a Tiger Woods fan as they come. I am not a stalker nor have I been to any golf tourney that he plays in, but I will watch if he is on television no matter where I am. He is a once in a lifetime athlete who commands your attention no matter what you think of him. The media today is truly spoiled. Micheal Jordan showed us how winners are on the floor. Derek Jeter does the same on the baseball field. Roger Federer personifies it on the tennis court. Floyd Mayweather does it in the ring. Micheal Phelps in the pool.  These men just know how to win and do it at all costs and do it at a level that most of all of us cannot comprehend.
Listening to the media coverage after Tiger won on Monday, you would think that Tiger was still public enemy number 1 and that winning this tournament was no big deal. Yes he has won at this course 8 times which is unprecedented. Some of the people chasing him had won their as well. The big question after the victory is whether or not he was going to win a major or not this year. Every pundit said the Masters maybe or the P.G.A. because they are a course he has played on before. Implying that Tiger can only win at the tournaments where he has a history at or has won before on. Yes last year he won Arnies', Jacks',his event to give him his victories last season. So I can see where they are making their argument. My point is that he has seventy five victories and they haven't all come on his favorite courses. If they did,so what? Can you same something that you have done successfully 75 times and made s billion dollars doing it? I understand his compulsion to be better than Jack and emulate Federer. Tiger is still under 40 and firmly number 2 in the world with his sights set on number 1. Can't we just enjoy his pursuit without being inundated with speculative questions. If he wins 100 tournaments and on 17 majors is he still one notch below Jack?
Will the public be that cruel on Tiger if he cannot pass Jack? If we are cruel, then we are truly spoiled. I look forward to finding out...

Federer is simply the best..

Just when you thought that 2012 was going to be the year of vindication and triumph for all athletes, something happens that makes you realize that some thing just may not be meant to be.  Spain defeated Portugal and denied Christian Ronaldo a chance to be a champion in a year where he is clearly been defined as Europes best footballer.  He has had a magical year and leading his country to the Eurocup would have been quite a topping on his iced cream cone.  This year so far we have seen Tiger win three times after hearing that he may never win again.  Serena Williams winning Wimbeldon after being elimnated in the first round at the French and being deemed over the hill.  We have seen Lebron win his first title.  Coach Cal lead Kentucky to a title.  Maria Sharapova ascend to number 1 in the world and complete the career grand slam.  We have seen Dale Earnhardt Jr. win a NASCAR race and the Los Angeles Kings win the Stanly Cup.  Andy Murray could not unfortunately join this vindication group however.  The reason is tha Roger Federer was seeking his own vindication and validation.
Roger Federer has won more major titles in his sport than any individual has in their sport in this generation.  Serena has 14.  Tiger has 14, Kobe has 5.  Marty Brodeur has a handful. Derek Jeter has 5. Is he the greatest tennis player to live?  Most say yes because of some of the records he has posted.  The consecutive streak at number 1 is amazing.  The records for consecutive grand slam semi-finals and quarter finals will never be duplicated. He has made tennis more than relevant world wide and has elevated the play on the court.  I have never seen someone have a reply for every type of shot hit or every type of style.  I mean, he hits winning shots off of winning shots.  He "holds" shots on his racket and then strikes with precision of a surgeon.  He makes great players look silly and he has been doing this for many, many years.  He has beaten Sampras and Agassi.  He has an all court game that translates on all surfaces.  What else can one say?
The only problem for me is that he has only one French Open title because Rafael Nadal is just a better dirt baller.  I never saw Rod Laver play and so I cannot say that Federer was better than he.  Laver is the only man to win the grand slam of tennis.  He actually did it twice.  Laver had grace and finesse around the net and I often wonder what would Federer have done to off set his game.  The reason Nadal gets him on clay every time is the spin and kick of Nadals ball to Federer back hand give him fits. Laver was a lefty and may have used the "crafty"  lefty ways to defeat Federer.  We will of course never know but i wonder if they could C.G.I the match just to see what would happen.  Nadal actually beat Federer on grass a couple of years ago and made everyone speculate that the torch was about to be passed. Federer continues to show that he is not ready to relinquish anything and beating Murray in Wimbeldon, he reminds us that he still has game.
Federer is now the number 1 ranked player in the world again.  The Olympics will be yet another stage where he shows us how great he is.  I really wanted Murray to win the other morning because he truly is carrying the wait of the United Kingdom on his shoulders.  The Olympics are in London and maybe Murray will get another chance to play for the gold.  I just hope that he is not in Federers draw, because if he is, he will most certainly be defeated..

Lets talk roger federer

Recently i had a discussion with a colleague about why i feel that Federer is not the greatest tennis player ever to live. I was told that i am crazy for my theory but i am going to present it anyway.
In my opinion Pete Sampras is the greatest player i have ever seen. He reigned over an era of tennis when the best players ever to play were playing. He got to play them at their best and defeated them all with regularity. Rod Laver is probably the greatest player to live because to win 2 grand slams in a career will never be done again. Steffi Graf did in the same calendar year and Serena Williams did it over a two year span. Pete Sampras and Andre Agassi discouraged this generation of players which allowed for Federer to become what he has become.
Let me explain. Ivan Lendl took Pete Sampras under his wing and told him that being number 1 in the world you had to work harder than ten people combined working out. He would play a 5 set match and then go bike 20 miles. Gil Reyes trained Agassi like he was going to do the iron man competitions. They made tennis a full time commitment of body and mind. The players who came after Sampras and Agassi were Magnus Norman, Petr Korda and Marcello Rios. rumors were abound that each of the men would tank matches or not give their best effort because they did not want the pressure of being number 1. In fact when Petr Korda won the Australian open, he retired because he did not want the pressure of answering the questions that the number 1 player has to. Marcello Rios hated being the number 1 player so much that he retired way before he was ready to quit. Tomas Muster played only clay court tournaments because he could not compete with courier and Agassi and Sampras on the other surfaces.
then the next generation of players, Leyton Hewitt, Marat Safin, Juan Carlos Ferrero, Mark Phillippousis was the next group. Safin ascended to number 1 and whipped Sampras in the U.S. open and everyone thought a new day was coming. He hated being number one. Ferrero disappeared because he could not win on any other surface than clay. Hewitt had a great record against agassi, sampras and federer but injuries beset him. Phillipousis just did not have the complete game. Andy Roddick was supposed to be the next great one. David Nalbandian too. Most of these men mentioned simply did not have the desire, fight or fortitude to want to be a consistent champion. these young guns couldn't beat the old men and therefore never allowed their skills to elevate them to a higher level.
Federer has two peers, Andy Murray and Rafael Nadal. They have the same grit as Sampras and Agassi. They currently have winning records against Federer in their last few head to head matches. If Nadal had not gotten injured, who knows what his year was going to be. Andy Murray is a year away from dominating this sport. His all court game is pretty cool to watch develop. Federer came at the right time in his sport. The only two players who wanted to challenge him were past their primes. Only recently has anyone challenged Federer. Sampras had Edberg, Becker, MC enroe, Agassi, Courier, Chang, Rafter, Connors, and Lendl to contend with on every surface on a weekly basis. Federer has made 20 plus consecutive grand slam semi finals. Who does he have to wade his way through to get to a championship. The men i mentioned before all would have quit before the match started. How many hall of fame players is Federer competing against these days? One!!! Sampras never won the French open which gives all of the Federer people ammunition. However I saw Sampras singlehandedly defeat the Russian Davis cup team on clay. Maybe his single greatest achievement. Is Federer freakishly good? Well hell yes. Most of his career, he didnt have a tennis coach. He sees the game with clarity that no one else ever has. Sampras kept matches simple. He just overpowered you and if he needed to show you a running forehand he quickly demoralized you with that shot. Federer may be the greatest ball striker ever. He hits shots from every angle cleaner than anyone i have ever seen. Sampras had to compete against players who had different styles. Today, no one serves and volleys like edberg or mc enroe. When players get don in matches today, no one seems to have a plan b. They quit essentially. players today may be faster and more athletic, but have no variety in their games. During the Sampras era each match was a chess match. Yes he overpowered some people but when his serve wasnt clicking or his volleys were not sharp, sampras relied on his forehand or his strong baseline game to win. Federer is great, but for my money I am taking Sampras.