GEORGE BASTL AND THE LAST OF SAMPRAS - 2002 WIMBLEDON

The end of an era - Pete Sampras just played his final Wimbledon game

Injuries, the single impediment for any athlete's progress comes unexpectedly - disrupting the plans, goals and in some cases one's career. Even with the latest technological aids and medical facilities available, the coping and recovery mechanisms are not formulated to suit everybody. While one recovers and continues to play their sport, others might have to look for alternatives beside sport.

This has been the case with George Bastl, the tall Swiss who emulated the feat of his fellow country man Roger Federer in 2002. Perhaps, the only common thing Federer and Bastl share in tennis happens to be 'Sampras' and defeating the champion on a territory which the American had made his own. If Roger Federer won a closely fought encounter in 2001 (4th round), George Bastl's triumph had the shades comparable to David overcoming Goliath. On a Wednesday, what people thought about being another opponent for Sampras progress - it came as a shock to see him ousted in a second round match to a lucky loser ranked 145 in the world.

GRAVEYARD OF CHAMPIONS

Oh yes, the superstitious and the infamous patterns keep coming no matter what. Not very often you find big names play outside of Court No. 1 or the centre court. The second round encounter between the seven-time Wimbledon champion Pete Sampras and the unknown George Bastl was scheduled at Court No.2 - also known as the 'graveyard of the champions'. As it turned out, the second round match was the last time Sampras played at the All England Club.

HOW IT UNFOLDED

The crowd could not believe what was happening as Bastl raced to a two-set lead. It appeared as though Sampras was not in his best frame of mind. He was seen reading notes between the games written by his wife Bridgette Wilson - "Remember, you're the greatest player who has ever held a racket in the hand". It did fire him up and the next two sets, he showed his aggressive game as Bastl found it difficult to break his serve or put any pressure on it. The American won 6-4, 6-3 to make it two sets all.

Those words from his wife kept Sampras going - only to a point

Enter fifth set and this is where the mental game of the players came into play as bodies started to worn out. Sampras had seen it all before and importantly he knew how to win from such situations  - whereas Bastl had never won a five-setter before after turning professional. He had nothing to lose and unless he won this encounter, he knew this would be just another match.

The games raced, one by one with each player holding his serve. In the eighth game with Bastl serving, Sampras had two break points while leading 4-3. From 15-40 down, Bastl served his way to level the scores and then remarkably broke the American's serve in the next game. Just when Sampras seemed like getting back to his ominous rhythm, Bastl played four perfect points to break his serve. The match was turned all of a sudden and so did the fortunes. Sampras, unless he had something else to showcase was staring at his worst exit at Wimbledon since 1991. He sat motionless, looked out of sorts and it took time to face the fact - he's out of the tournament.

LAST TIME AT WIMBLEDON

No matter what one's past records are, it is a challenge to remain at the top of the game consistently with time. If Sampras was outdone by one Swiss in 2001, the next year another Swiss knocked him out. "I have not lost the game, Bastl won it. At the end, he was mentally much stronger than I, and that you have to recognise". The drama, the disappointment and the pain of such a defeat only showed what a great champion Sampras was throughout his career, especially in Wimbledon. At the press conference after the defeat - "I plan on being back. I'm not going to end my time here with that loss. I really felt I could do it here and I feel really bummed out. I feel like I can win one major - I will continue to play."  It wasn't that Sampras played badly or was in poor form. Those 'two words' can be a dampener to give credit where it is due. Bastl played the game of his life and after all, Sampras did went on to win the US Open a few months later.

George Bastl played the game of his life to oust the seven-time champion 

A DECADE LATER

Unlike Roger Federer, George Bastl didn't even make it to the top 70 in his entire life. The win over Pete Sampras remained his only shining glory of his career. Ask any of the tennis fans, they remember Bastl for that reason - and for that alone. His life post that match changed and he was recognised by quite a few people on the circuit. While tennis career never took off, he had to focus on other avenue to sustain his livelihood. He earned a finance degree from a university in California and now works in the same industry. Over the years, any interview with Bastl is incomplete without being asked about 'that' match. Those wonderful memories remain just that - memories. 

WILLKOMMEN DAVIS CUP IN DER SCHWEIZ

                                                     Team Switzerland with the 2014 Davis Cup title                             Image Courtesy: Guardian

Switzerland becomes only the 14th country to lift the prestigious World cup of men's tennis - Davis Cup. This is a fitting considering the Swiss team boasts of arguably one of the best tennis players ever. If winning the Davis Cup title is a single's challenge, then Federer would have found a way to win this annual event much before. Unlike the many singles titles he has won, Davis Cup is a team event. No matter how well you play, there are moments you sit tight, watch the action, cheering your teammate and hope he wins it for you, for the team and for the country.

With Stan Wawrinka playing as well as he ever did, Switzerland had two players going into the finals - who could dictate terms on their own at crucial phases of a game. They have tasted glory before for Switzerland - Remember Beijing Olympics in 2008? The iconic scene is still fresh in my memory. It was Stan and Roger show six years ago and now in 2014, it is the same story.

DAVIS CUP AND SWITZERLAND

The 2014 Davis Cup finals happened to be the second time Switzerland qualifying for the title showdown. Turn the clock back to 1992, a golden year for Swiss tennis. Marc Rosset, surprisingly and more impressively took the single's gold medal at the 1992 Barcelona Olympics - a feat which has not been emulated by a Swiss player till date. On back of a remarkable success on the clay courts of Barcelona, Marc Rosset and his teammate Jakob Hlasek competed against the mighty and talented bunch of players from the United States for the Davis Cup title. The limited resources of Switzerland hurt them dearly as they lost the finals tie 1-3 to a team which had Pete Sampras and John McEnroe play doubles while Andre Agassi and Jim Courier played singles. The sole consolation had to be Rosset's win over Jim Courier which was settled in five sets.

Marc Rosset (left) and Jakob Hlasek did their best in 1992 to win the Davis Cup and finished second to USA

A VICTORY FOR THE COUNTRY

Switzerland as a country is complexly united and never allow their individual differences to come in the way of being a single entity. While individuals might go and achieve great things, they are seldom secluded and revered or given a red carpet treatment. Yes, they are acknowledged as celebrities and that's where the distinction ends. Even these 'celebrities' are foremost Swiss citizens and here people as a group always takes priority over individuals. So, quite fittingly Davis cup victory is something this tiny country will be proud of, as the honour is bestowed to 'Switzerland' and not to individuals. 

GET SHORTY - EXPERIMENTS WITH TENNIS

                Roger Federer and Lleyton Hewitt face each other in 2015 for an experimental match       Photo Courtesy: News.au

The trend to get smarter, slimmer and compact keeping in view of the times and the time is catching up with tennis as well. While there have been changes implemented steadily, tennis fans worldwide would now soon be served with the fast food version of 'tennis'.

Starting this November, there will be two premier international tournaments held in different cities across Asia. The format is compact and the organisers have taken a certain degree of liberty to make it interesting and equally exciting.

In 2015, Roger Federer and Lleyton Hewitt will face each other (January 12) in Sydney for an exhibition match. This is no ordinary match and will certainly be different than the previous 27 games they played against each other.

THE INGREDIENTS

Forget the long hours waiting with baited breath, heart rate pumping as the final set goes on and on. Every point became agonisingly painful if you happen to support a player and is losing. In this experimental match, there is no slow death for a player; instead it is quick, precise and to an extent time bound. The format of the game will have four modifications to the conventional tennis rules.

a. No advantage scoring - Its 'deuce' and one error on either player's part, the game is gone. The pressure is intense on the player to hold the serve at deuce. This rule is a time saver.

b. No service lets - Let, first service. Now, how many times in a game does one hear this call? Without service lets, a lot of time can be saved.

c. Tie breakers at three games all - Match is poised at 3-3 and spectators have just warmed up. It's time for a tie breaker. To me, I believe just having six games before having to decide the set by a tie-breaker is too quick for my liking. Instead, I would go for a tie-breaker at 6-6 with first to reach 4 points taking the set. For now, I choose to be open-minded and participate as a spectator in this experiment.

d. Sets to first-four games - Whoever breaks the serve has the momentum as long as he holds the serve in the set. This is too quick for my liking and like I mentioned in the above point - I will wait, watch and then give my opinion.

IS THERE A NEED?

Though I belong to a group of traditional tennis lovers, I do see a point as to why there is an emphasis to have a shorter format of tennis. Cricket too underwent this change in the past decade and since, the shorter format has been commercially successful. The point which will be debated - Will we miss out on watching epic battles which test the skills, stamina and a lot more from the players before a winner is decided while there are 'quickie' tournaments where everything is clockwork and the game can be wrapped up under two hours.Which will appeal in the longer run?

In an era where people are content with mere headlines than the content that follows it, the shorter version of tennis, if approved by the International Tennis Federation will have commercial advantages and make a fantastic product for TV audiences. The question remains as to how will you integrate this format in today's tennis world. Will you have age-restrictions? or do you create a parallel tournament with a possibility of having shorter formats of the four major Grand Slam tournaments? Will there be a separate Davis Cup for shorter and longer formats? or will the tennis as a whole be truncated for the sake of time saving practices and taking the excess load out of tennis players? 

The ATP and WTA tour operators will be monitoring this closely as they would be quick to jump to the shorter format if there is more money to be made. Or will the idea remain rooted only at the club and social events?

ON A FINAL NOTE

Shorter format of tennis will reduce the time while basics of playing tennis would remain the same. The International leagues namely International Premier Tennis League (by Mahesh Bhupathi) and Champions Tennis League by Vijay Amrtitaj have big names on their rooster and have rules amended to suit the nature of this business-cum-sport venture. How will this and the exhibition match in January would impact the rule changes needs to be seen. It is too early to make an definitive opinion - however going by the trend in world of sports, shorter format of tennis is here to stay - whether one likes it or not.  

A STEP AWAY FROM HISTORY - FEDERER AND THE SWISS DAVIS CUP TEAM

The dream team-duo of  Roger Federer and Stan Wawrinka have steered the Swiss national team to Davis Cup finals - only their second appearance. The dream which remained distant for more than twenty years is finally within their grasp.

Swiss Tennis has made constant headlines in the last two decades; starting with Marc Rosset's incredible gold medal at the 1992 Barcelona Olympics. Then came the talented kid on the tennis world to grace women's tennis - Martina Hingis. It was Hingis who took Switzerland and its tennis programme to great heights before her career came to an end prematurely. The mantle was then passed on to Roger Federer and he has exceeded everyone's expectations and went on to become the best athlete his country has ever produced and one of the best tennis has ever witnessed.

Roger Federer has won almost everything that has to be won in tennis singles, barring Olympic Gold singles and Davis Cup. He was always a lone man who pushed his team and on more than one occasion the dreams of Davis Cup were weakened by the absence of a solid #2 singles player. With the progress Wawrinka has had so far in 2014, the combo 'FEDERINKA' looked favourites coming into the semi-finals clash against Italy and so far they have emulated Switzerland's best performance at the Davis Cup.

A CLASS APART

Before the last day, the tie between Switzerland and Italy was 2-1 in favour of the home side, Switzerland. The Geneva indoor stadium at Palexpo was a sea of red and white fans filled with great enthusiasm. The weather was perfect and the buzz on those temporary seating - constant cheers, foot tapping, horns being blown and the loud vocal support whenever Roger Federer was pushed to a corner with his opponent on a break point was just too much for the Italians to handle. It showed in the way they played.

Federer started slowly and it took some time before we saw him bring out his discipline executing those volleys unsettling Fabio Fognini and forced him make those unforced errors. Within no time, the Swiss ace had taken the first set 6-2.

In the second set, it was the same story expect that Fognini held his serve one more than he did in the first set. A little too easy perhaps for the 17-time Grand slam winner as he won the second set 6-3.

Fognini played some of his best game in the third set. It was 'the set' as far as Italy was concerned. Perhaps, it was too much to expect Fognini to outclass Federer - but what if he took the match to the fifth set? Federer is no longer in his twenties and once you are in fifth set, it is anybody's game. Fognini took the lead 6-5 and Federer did well enough to force a tie breaker.

I was given an impression, Federer was not at his best. The only motivation that seemed to him was to steer the team into the finals - something which he has never managed to achieve in his illustrious career. This was his and Switzerland's best chance since their semi-finals appearance in 2003.

In the tiebreaker, Federer was in a different zone and the intent was seen as he did not let the match to slip or go the distance. He brought on all his skills and aggression to the court which saw him take the lead 6-4 in the tiebreak. One point separated the place in the finals. Crowd is busy engrossed in their songs and praises while the umpire had to beg once, twice for their silence.

The silence was short-lived as the crowd went berserk, so does the Swiss master and the entire Swiss Davis cup team. This was a result they had never experienced previously and soon the band of brothers took the central stage, waving to all sections of the crowd. Federer was ferried held high across the courts by Wawrinka and their coach Severin Lüti - a sight of happiness, relief and an opportunity to win the elusive Davis Cup title.

When it came to lifting Wawrinka, he ran away before making his intentions clear to his mates about him not in a mood to be carried around.

Roger Federer is ranked third and Wawrinka fourth in the ATP rankings currently. Wawrinka's famous win at this year's Australian Open and Federer's consistent show has ensured Switzerland to field two of the best singles players on the circuit. The rest of the team are relatively unknown, who in spite of playing on the circuit for close to a decade, have rarely made any significant contribution.

The quarterfinals against Kazakhstan early this year was a narrow escape which needed Switzerland to win both the reverse singles matches to enter semi-finals. And finals will be even greater challenge with three of the top 20 ranked players feature in the French team.

The crowd which came in great numbers to witness the Swiss team knew there is a not a lot of tennis left in Federer's career. His personal life with four children and a lovely wife is a huge incentive for him not to keep on playing. One fine day, he might just take a call of calling it quits. A world cup in tennis is just around the corner and what a wonderful addition it would be to his career. For Swiss, it is their country that comes first and then individuals - though it is only fair from what we witnessed, Swiss love Roger! and they will root him and his teammates to win their first Davis Cup title.

There will be people - a lot of them from Switzerland who will be queuing up in France to witness this historic moment unfold. The last time these two countries met was in 2004 quarterfinals - in which the Swiss team lost. That was ten years ago and Switzerland back then did not boast itself of having two solid singles players. Things look different and I must say, now  they look favourites.

In 1992, the Swiss team was blown away by the sheer talent of the US Davis cup team. Jim Courier, Andre Agassi playing the singles while John McEnroe and Pete Sampras partnered in doubles.

Will it be too much on the shoulders of Federer and Wawrinka when compared with a better all-round team of France led by Tsonga with Richard Gasquet and Monfils in the squad?

While in the singles, the Swiss appear sharper - but on a given day these three players from France are more than capable to beat the Swiss stars. It will not be a one-sided final. However, emotionally all eyes will be on Switzerland and in particular Roger Federer! 

FEDERER vs NOVAK - WIMBLEDON 2014

                                                                      A clash to remember                                         Source: ABC

In the end the satisfying part of watching a Wimbledon finals was that - it involved two humans at the peak of their individual skills exhibiting their repertoire, physical reserves that seemed invisible to themselves and acute mental awareness in spite of times when the title seemed to run away with the other person.

A LOOK BACK AT THE THIRD SET

My moment of the third set was the games leading up to the tie-breaker and the tie-breaker itself. Two clearly matched opponents - nullifying each other's strokes of geniuses. Then Novak wins a crucial point, he is excited and he urges the crowd to cheer him on, loud and more loud. He sensed, the third set was all his and that it was.

FEDERER GOES WILD

If looked in isolation, having missed the championship point, Djokovic was never the same player for the next five games. Trailing 2-5 and with opponent having a break point, Federer boxed his way out, cornering Novak to one corner or the other, exhibiting some of the aggressive tennis seen in the match. It was counter-attack on a player who started to grunt more, losing energy with each stroke. He did not have a clue and if the tie break would have gone Federer's way in the third set, it would have been curtains for Novak. It was that phase of the match, irrespective of who the opponent was - 'Federer was in a class of his own'. He won the set 7-5 and the match proceeds to the fifth set.

NOVAK GETS A BREAK

At the beginning of the final set if one were to have analysed the fitness levels of these two great athletes - the younger Novak (by six years) would lose hands down to Federer. It was advantage Federer all-over. Novak takes a medical time-out to sooth his aching calf and ankle muscles and to bring his mind in order. In boxer's term, he was just handed a series of 'deadly punches' which he just could not defend, denting his confidence a little. He was anything but cheerful in the fourth set and that spoke about his mental health - which was shattered by the assault of Federer. The momentum was with Federer and now the brakes have been applied by Djokovic.

THE HUSTLER

Federer was calm and went about his tennis in the final set with a similar approach as he did in the fourth set. Novak ensured he held on to his serve - which at that point was the only sensible thing to do. He had no chance whatsoever to score a point of Federer's serve - never mind breaking the same. Three games in which Federer served - he gave nothing at all to his Serbian opponent. On the other hand, in contrast Novak struggled and Federer's plan was to break Novak's serve early. He had his chances but Novak was better to fend any such threats. 4-3 to Djokovic and Federer to serve.

Up until that game, Novak was playing with minimum effort, doing just a little to defend and hold on to his serve - as though he knew he wanted to use his reserve energy some other time. He upped his ante in the eighth game and took the game to a far amount of distance - an indication that he was back.

He felt and it was seen, he could now dictate terms. He almost broke Federer's serve. The next sensible thing Novak did was to go 5-4 and then play his final set of cards. He knew, he can win if he can break Federer's serve right there in the tenth game. If it were to extend any further, he would lose it. Physically he looked much more drained than his Swiss opponent. As he was in the process of winning the ninth game, he urged the fans to cheer him. A similar trait - which kept him going in the third set.

    

Now, this sort of mindset is what keeps a champion like 'Novak' advance to his goal. Beyond a limit, exists a zone where his mental ability counter balances his physical ineptness. He sensed, this was it - Carpe Diem!! Novak broke the serve and Wimbledon was all his!

    

THE CHAMPION

Novak Djokovic won his second Wimbledon title and finally managed to erase his losing streak in the Grand Slam finals. He knew he had slipped on more than few occasions in the match and that was the beauty of this finals! His seventh title was something he would cherish a long time to come. He has won seven trophies out of fourteen finals that he has participated and a first against Roger Federer. He knew it was special! and he knew he had to snatch it from Roger - especially if you look how the last hour of this match panned out. He is courteous enough to say it in public, acknowledging his family, support staff and specially to Federer for handing over this championship to him.

THE JUICE

For Federer, he surprised himself to an extent that he could go this far a distance. Maybe it is to do with Wimbledon or maybe it is to do about him. Actually it is do with him. He along with three other champions come to my immediate mind as I write this. Michael Jordan, Sachin Tendulkar and Michael Schumacher. After all they have achieved in their respective sporting careers, having stayed on top for so long, the fear of losing the sheen from their illustrious career never came in their way - as long as they knew they were giving 100% and enjoyed the process of being a competitive athlete.

In the 1995 action thriller 'Heat' - Robert De Niro summons his gang of bank robbers (three) before committing one last heist. Though he is a criminal, he displays his humane touch asking his three buddies if they want to back out and live the rest of their lives with 'huge sums of money' they made and start a new life. He would not judge if they backed out. Val Kilmer says 'The bank is worth the risk, I need it brother'. De Niro turns to Tom Sizemore, who hesitates to back out - " Elaine takes good care of you. You got plenty put away. You got T-bonds, real estate. If I were you, I would be smart. I would cut loose of this."  Tom Sizemore looks in the eyes of De Niro, turns around to look at his other mates and turns to De Niro and says - "Well, you know. For me, the action is the juice, I'm in".

Marathon Man vs Raging Bull - Federer vs Nadal at the Majors

Rafael Nadal lost in the final hurdle of Australian Open 2014 to a Swiss tennis player. It was not Roger Federer for once! Stainslas Wawrinka was the underdog going into the final men's singles match and at the end of it his achievements echoed the feelings of "Yo, Adrian, I did it". This was no Hollywood and Wawrinka's celebrations was nowhere close to the exuberance 'Rocky Balboa'  exhibited on-screen in Rocky II.

Important question - If Nadal were to be 100% fit, would Wawrinka be a threat to Nadal and his power play? Make no mistake the end result did appear as an upset and even with Wawrinka's confidence brimming sky high, it would have been a herculean effort to win against the quality player like Nadal. In fact age-wise, Nadal is a year younger to the reigning Australian Open champion; so there is no question of young legs over powering the might. In Wawrinka's defence, he is probably playing the best tennis of his life at the moment and his win must not be treated as a total surprise.

I rest the case of Wawrinka here and introduce another champion, his compatriot Roger Federer. It is interesting to note that, Federer this year was playing in his 57^th Grand Slam event since Australian Open 2000. He is currently in his 15^th year of playing non-stop at the premier events of tennis. That's in the level of a iron man if not a marathon man.

Top stuff! considering the number of events conducted around the four major tournaments and throw in few national tournaments in between, you are looking at a very packed and physically demanding schedule. He will be 33 years by the time he would be playing his first match at the US Open and honestly going by the past record, only few players have managed to win singles title at that age. His peak years are behind him and all he has with him are the years of experience and the inner desire to play tennis. He loves playing tennis - a fact pretty evident as he does not seem to be bogged down with legacy and terms like 'retiring on a high'.

Now coming to the pocket dynamo, the enigmatic Nadal and his performances at the Grand Slams. He turns 28 this June and he already has 13 titles to his credit - including French Open a record 8 times (Whoa, that's out of this world stuff!!!). In spite of all his muscles, his penchant for baseline tennis and what not (ask the ladies), I have a problem with him when it comes to consistency.

It is not that Nadal is extraordinary, even Federer had 15 titles to his credit when he was 28 years of age. And going by the trend in tennis, it is a lot difficult to win as age advances. This is one sport where there is no replacement for physical demands. Experience and skills can guide you in crunch moments - if one is not fit to run around and constantly play the strokes with ease and precise, you are asking for trouble.

Since the time Nadal has made his Grand Slam debut - forty three Grand Slam tournaments have taken place and he has missed six tournaments during this period. He has managed to play a meagre 13 major tournaments in a row. 

On the court Nadal exerts himself to such a degree that he is prone to injuries - a technical flaw in my opinion. Probably the number would have been much less than 13 if he had taken a more steady approach. It's his natural game! 

Talking about steadiness - it is interesting to note that Nadal is a natural baseline player who loves and prefers to drain out his opponents engaging in a series of long rallies. Federer is quite the opposite; he loves to play serve and volley. Though well adapted to playing long rallies, he is always short of answers when it comes to playing on slow surfaces against the top three. Off late he is struggling practically in every surface and he is relying on his skills and all the knowledge accumulated over the years to reach the top four or top eight.

Federer remains a disciplined student of the game like a school student who refuses to skip even a single lecture till his schooling days are over. On the other hand, Nadal epitomises the 'cool' college going student who is smart, pumped up and restless like a raging bull - prone to accidents now and then, only to make a comeback with a bang. The mixed fortune cycle of pain and glory repeats at regular intervals. How long can he sustain such a professional lifestyle? One, two, three, four years or more.... Luckily, age is on his side.

As to Roger Federer - the 'aura' of  awesomeness is missing from the past 3-4 years. Yet, he marches on year after year participating in many of the elite tournaments worldwide, travelling constantly with his young family, fighting to remain in the top five with a hope of one last victory at a Grand Slam. It's been a while he shed those tears of joy and kiss the winner's trophy - a ritual which he and a lot of his fans were so accustomed to. 

"Legend remains victorious in spite of history" - Sarah Bernhardt 

From the Scots and of the Brits - Murray's win at the Wimbledon 2013

I recall the last evening and wonder - Was this the greatest evening in the history of British tennis in the Open era? Andy Murray sheds off the monkey after 77 years to become the first British singles male player to win at Wimbledon. Fred Perry, a champion in Table Tennis and Tennis had many accolades as an athlete. He has remained the benchmark in British tennis for a long time and with Andy Murray winning yesterday, the best of the present has finally shook hands with the best of the past.

Andy Murray tasted his first real success at the 2012 London Olympics, when he won the gold medal against the odds vs. Federer. Though it was in Wimbledon, it was not quite the Wimbledon. Nevertheless, he united the kingdom of British Islands last year and gave a reason to celebrate. With that victory, he also gave them a real hope. 

A hope, which agonisingly and falsely haunted many fans who turned up each year in anticipation of watching their fellow Brit win the Wimbledon Championships. Though it must be noted, Virginia Wade is technically the last British player and the only British woman till date to win Wimbledon singles title (1977, the centenary year of Wimbledon championships).

Murray went on to win the US Open after the gold medal in 2012, thereby becoming the first singles male player from Isles of British to win a Grand Slam tournament since, you guessed it right, Fred Perry. Alright, now that he had arrived on the circuit, the expectations had only begun to swell and it reached new heights at this year’s finals. Personally, I prefer Djokovic style of playing tennis to Murray’s - I quite don’t know why it is this way, but it has been this way since a long time. I chose Sampras over Agassi, Federer over Nadal and now Djokovic over Murray.

However, credit must be given where it is due and yesterday, it was the Murray show. He is now the first British male to win any title in the open era, an era of shorts and with just 26 years of age, expect him to fight it out for more titles to come.

The men’s singles finals of 2013 Wimbledon also happened to be the first match this year where I sat to watch from start to finish. The finals started minutes after Sebastian Vettel had won his home Grand Prix for the first time - I wondered if history were to be made in tennis too.

Growing up, I always felt United Kingdom as a whole and the individual countries that make up the Great Britain were skewed in nature - especially and atleast to me in matters related to sports. Be it football, rugby or even cricket, you talk about England, Scotland and Wales (In cricket, England and Wales are combined). However, the Olympic traditions in this part of the world are maintained and continue to operate under one banner – Great Britain. Davis Cup tennis is included in this list too.

It is the sport that dictates where your feelings are and what outfits, paints and tattoos one has to flaunt.

Till date, I have not been able to get beyond the definitions of the island of Britain and the countries which give the definition of the same. David Cameroon, was seen cheering for Andy Murray and alongside him – Bradley Cooper, Gerard Butler, Mick Jagger, Sir Chris Hoy and the entire crowd, irrespective of which country they were from, all cheered for Britain’s sake and not necessarily as Scots. 

 David Cameron, PM of United Kingdom and First Minister Alex Salmond raising the Scottish flag
Image Courtesy: Sun

This is the uniqueness of type of Sport you play and Murray was indeed lucky that tennis is not divided by one’s country like other sports in United Kingdom.

He is by far the greatest Scottish tennis player ever. He now needs to win a career Grand Slam, which will put him on level with Fred Perry as the greatest British male tennis player ever. Tennis was not an Olympic sport at the time Perry was at his peak in tennis.

After years and many decades, the British tennis fans have finally got their true tennis hero. I always wondered why they haunted Tim Henman, who at his best was a semi-finals material. He was in semi-finals on four occasions at Wimbledon between 1998 and 2002 and that achievement alone deserved the status of having a hill named after him. Such was the state of British tennis.

The tennis in Britain has gone to a new level in the past year. Andy Murray, the Olympic gold medal winner, US Open champion and now Wimbledon has only raised the bar for fellow British men who wish to pursue tennis.

Who among the crowd yesterday had witnessed Fred Perry’s achievements too in 1936? It looks highly unlikely as 77 years is a huge gap. Since then, there have been a lot of changes in Britain, yet the name of Fred Perry remained constant in the annals of their tennis history. Make no mistake; it will continue to do so, however now, there is a new addition in Murray, which people will not forget either. Both their names will be taken in the same breath, till the time a new player reaches their level.

Will Murray be awarded with the knighthood? I don’t see any reason why he won’t have his chance at it soon, considering the merits that are taken into account for awarding the prefixed title of Sir to one’s name.

My love with tennis began watching my cousins adoring the plays of Sabatini, Graf and Seles. Though it must be said on a serious note, it was Wimbledon in 1993 watching Sampras take the title. He followed up with six more, before bidding a good bye to the sport in 2002.

Roger Federer, who by no means is finished (atleast by his admission), won his first Wimbledon in 2003. I am not sure, if he plays in the next year’s Wimbledon, but he can only improve his record at Wimbledon and at the worst will still remain in level with seven victories next only to Sampras and William Renshaw (in the 19^th century).

Now, in 2013 Andy Murray wins his first Wimbledon. Will he too move to the next level and join the elite company which is jointly held by Federer, Renshaw and Sampras? Or will he be just known as the next best player in Britain after Fred Perry? We just have to wait. To me, it doesn’t matter.

Like i said before, I don’t see myself rooting for Murray like I did for Sampras and Federer. 

Have I seen Federer one last time at Wimbledon? Deja-vu from 2002

My mind went to the memories of 2001 last year when I saw Andy Murray defeating Roger Federer to claim the gold medal at the 2012 Olympics at the Wimbledon. I was in my class 12 then in 2001 as I watched a young Swiss playing his heart out against a champion, a legend when it came to playing on the grass courts of Wimbledon.

Roger Federer met Pete Sampras for the first time at Wimbledon in 2001. The nineteen-year old from Switzerland had nothing to lose. His compatriot, Martina Hingis the top seed at that year’s Wimbledon was knocked out in the first round – so my hopes all rested on the American to defend his title yet again. He looked set to win his 8^th Wimbledon title.

Call it arrogance or simply blind faith at that time; I thought there was nobody who could beat Sampras at Wimbledon. It is true, the likes of Marat Safin had won against Sampras against all odds at 2000 US Open, but common on, we are talking about Wimbledon and with such thoughts occupied in my mind, parallely the game went on nervously, it affected me and to many who were present live watching the match. Finally, the nerves got the better of the person, who had expectations from almost everyone.

Tense is an understatement and all I could hope at that time was, the best shall prevail and the best to me was Sampras. No doubts about it. The few images I had of Federer were that of a Sportstar photographs with him next to Hingis and the one holding the Hopman Cup. I was a huge fan of Martina Hingis and I followed their exploits early that year when they ended up on the winning side at the Hopman Cup (2001) in Australia. Long hair, small eyes and a head band to go with, was all I had known of Federer before the match against Sampras.

My worst fears came true as I saw the return from Sampras hitting the net and the next moment Federer down on his knees. He had caught the big fish on the market and he didn’t quite know how to celebrate it. He was the talk of the town and though he didn’t went on to win the championship; the quality of his strokes and play was showcased in a grand way to the tennis audience across the globe. An era was about to come to an end, the domination, the long streak which Sampras enjoyed came to an abrupt halt.

The defeat of 2001, what do I make of it? All I said then was I need a good 18^th birthday present next time around when Sampras played Wimbledon in 2002. I was like that back then, and that's how I viewed sports. Sampras battled on for the rest of the season and had lost US Open finals towards the end of the year to another rookie Lleyton Hewitt. He was clearly not winning the titles, but consistently he was making it to the title clashes. Sampras was good, but nowhere near his peak form.

Next year Wimbledon, same hopes and this time Sampras played not as a defending champion anymore. The only time previously he played without defending the Wimbledon title was in 1997 and prior to that was in 1992. This was 2002 and he had lost just three matches in those last 10 years, he played at Wimbledon. He was two months shy of being 31, so there were no issues with ageing. I still had hopes on him to turn it around and win the oldest Grand Slam tournament for the 8^th time.

Then the news came as a shock. Pete Sampras knocked out of Wimbledon at the second round by George Bastl. Who the hell is this Bastl? A lucky loser from the qualifying tournament which enabled him to play in the main draw; and coincidentally he was a Swiss too.

I felt and I am sure a lot others felt too, then and there at that moment Sampras time was up. No regrets. Sometimes things do not go as we wish and so be it; he lost yet another five setter match, in consecutive years at Wimbledon and both the winners hailing from the same country. Why make a big deal and instead I chose to relish his 13 victories thus far.

All I hoped was a good farewell and that he got at the US Open, when he won his 14^th Grand Slam title in front of his home ground against his countrymen and a rival for many years, Andre Agassi.

I knew, he played his last match and the scene of his wife Bridgette Wilson, wearing a beige coloured outfit exchanging smiles and pleasantries with an emotionally drained Pete Sampras is still etched in my memory. In a span of few months, both my favourites at that time had faded away. First the Swiss Miss, Martina Hingis and now Pete Sampras. 

Image Courtesy: CBS.com

No matter how easy or difficult it is, or was – you just move on. Never in my life had I thought Federer would be the man I would choose to support once Sampras retired, even when he defeated Sampras in the 2001 encounter. Times change and as a sports lover, you gotta pick up someone or fancy someone to win, or else there is no fun. And so, it was Federer, the instinctive choice to support next.

To me, Federer was an ideal replacement for Sampras. Serve and volley at Wimbledon was all there to be seen. Federer won his first title the following year in 2003. Since then and more so from Wimbledon 2004, he has marched on reaching to new heights which yielded him 17 Grand Slam titles, a career Grand Slam, Olympic doubles gold medal and a silver medal. Amongst those conquests, he fought many fierce rivals of the likes of Nadal, Djokovic and since couple of years Andy Murray.

His record streak of reaching 36 quarterfinal appearances is now done and dusted. The last time he went out this early was in 2002 Wimbledon championships. I was talking and thinking about his first win in 2003 while I was cooking tonight and then few moments later I got to know of him crashing out of this year’s Wimbledon. No Maria Sharapova too in the current tournament, my other favourite and now Federer’s exit has made an unknown Ukrainian Sergiy Stakhovsky enter the limelight at this year’s Wimbledon. 

First it was Nadal’s exit, but he was never consistent barring at the French Open and now Federer’s exit is big news for the Fedex fans and to the media; his defeat is even bigger news for Staskovsky and his contingent of supporters.

Now my whole scribbling of memories of the past 10 years begs the question. Have I seen the last match of Roger Federer in Wimbledon? He will be 32 come this August 8^th and looks fit to carry on. It isn’t about how fit he is, it is more than that to remain in the peak form when it comes to playing tennis.

For now, I won’t say anything more and I shall wait for this year’s Flushing Meadows before asking the inevitable question which I asked about Sampras to myself eleven years ago at this time of the year.

There is nothing wrong in retiring; it takes a lot more than poor form or injury to give up the sport you love. Legacy is the last thing an athlete should worry and in this case, I am confident Federer knows when it is time to call it quits.