Golf expected at British Open; AARP meeting ensues

Well, check this out.  After nearly two rounds at the British, Rocco Mediate, Greg Norman, and Tom Lehman are all within two strokes of the lead (Rocco tied for the lead, Norman 1 back, Lehman 2 back).  It’ll be fun to watch this unfold.

The greatest game ever played, anywhere, anytime, in any sport

Of course happened today.  I’ll spare the details, except to say that epic matches generally involve one of the following:

1) An amazing comeback

2) A conquest of the final challenge before a great competitor

3) The dethroning of a legendary champion

4) Quality play that transcends the sport

5) Five hours of play that isn’t enough

It had them all.  I can’t imagine a better tennis match, or even a better game.  The best sporting events of my lifetime have probably been the Texas-USC Rose Bowl, the Tiger-Rocco throwdown, and Game 7 of the 2001 World Series.  This one eclipsed them all, particularly given the intense rivalry that existed in this match.  I was privileged to watch it, and I hope someday to see something as good.

Rafael Nadal won me over today.  I sort of hated him prior to this match, especially since the media and many in the tennis community were completely unwilling to pay proper respect to the greatest champion in Wimbledon’s history and to whom I believe to be the second best player ever, behind Rod Laver.  Nadal was magnificent, classy, and the ultimate competitor today, and I’m glad that I can now cheer for him as well. 

As for Federer?  Many will claim his best days are gone, and that may well be true.  But this match, in a bizarre way, proved that he’s the greatest grass court player of our generation, and probably ever.  Nadal played flawless tennis today, and there’s no way he could have possibly played better.  Federer, despite playing at a high level, has been much, much better at Wimbledon before, and made more unforced errors than you would ordinarily expect, to say nothing of missed break opportunities.  There should be no claim that Nadal was the beneficiary of poor play from Federer, as he was still amazing today, but Roger could have been better, and I maintain that Federer at his best will defeat Nadal at his best on grass ten times out of ten.

In any event, we’ve got the U.S. Open before too terribly long, and I cannot wait, because these two are playing again.  It just wouldn’t be right any other way.  Djokovic, Roddick…….great players, and they’ll be a threat, but any tournament where these two aren’t playing for all the marbles had something go wrong.  For those who feared tennis couldn’t survive the dominance of Federer, here’s what you wanted: a champion worthy of Federer’s forehand, and a rivalry that combines the class for which the game is known and the skill of two of the best to ever pick up a racquet.  We’re lucky, all of us.

Further Federer obituaries: Federer now unable to accomplish basic tasks of daily living

Zero-time Wimbledon champion Nadal now has a mental edge over the five-time Wimbledon champion.

Seriously, people.  Nadal is a great player.  He was a great player one year ago, and he’s obviously much better now.  But Roger Federer has accomplished much, much more in every non-Roland Garros sense of the world.

Remember that Kobe>Jordan talk?  That’s what’s happening here.

Nadal actually has a chance on Sunday.  But that’s all it is: a chance.  Nadal needs to beat Federer at Wimbledon in order to be considered a worthy challenger to #1, and he has not done so yet.  Perhaps Sunday is the day, but I would suggest that two days isn’t long enough to cause us to fall all over ourselves, disregarding reason and history, to anoint Nadal the new #1.

Federer in four, and it won’t be that close.

Roger Federer must have actually lost to Hrbaty in the first round, because his clear superior is out in the second

Say it ain’t so?  Please?

One down, one to go.  Tread lightly when criticizing King Fed the Only.  Tread very lightly.

Ashley Harkleroad is a fabulously attractive young lady

Just noticed this in watching her battle Amelie Mauresmo, who is rather, er, masculine.  Some pics here and here.

Her game isn’t half bad either – lost a tight first set to Mauresmo and is battling now.

Edit: The above links don’t seem to work well and aren’t great anyway – plenty of pics at the site below:

http://www.harkleroadzone.com/photos.htm

Is it just me who’s sickened at the audacity of the proles?

Well, looky here.  Roger Federer is dead.  Nice of him to roll over.  It’s really cool that Djokovic and Nadal are tied for #1 in the world and that the likes of David Ferrer and maybe even David Nalbandian are on Federer’s tail for #3.  Why don’t they just take the bastard to the glue factory and get it over with?

I absolutely cannot believe folks.  All of a sudden, Roger Federer isn’t the prohibitive favorite at Wimbledon.  Two guys with a grand total of four majors between them are now calling the champion out on the carpet, and the mainstream media appears to have followed right along (see the barrage of ESPN pieces questioning Fed’s dynasty and dominance at Wimbledon).  Nadal’s well played loss at Wimbledon last year appears to be the best piece of evidence that the low class chronic ass-scratcher Nadal boosters have to support his chances this year, aside from Federer’s “slump”, which features a third consecutive French final, mono, and a “pathetic” semifinal at the Aussie.  Yeah, lousy bum, huh?

Look, I really like the game that Nadal and Djokovic bring.  They’re really great players and worthy #1 contenders.  But the King is not dead.  I cannot understand how these animals feel worthy to criticize Roger’s performance, or to imply that he is anything other than the very best player in tennis.  For a sportswriter to criticize Federer on the eve of Wimbledon is like some POS liberal arts major from Tufts calling out Shakespeare for being trite.  If you don’t think he’s going to win, then fine: but tread lightly when questioning Fed’s legacy.  Only Borg has ever dominated Wimbledon this way, and I think Federer’s dominance has actually been more complete.  Federer is a legitimate candidate to be considered the greatest of all time, and these guys are two young whelps who’ve won some matches.  Until that changes, spare us the “changing of the guard” crap, and don’t criticize your betters.

I honestly wouldn’t be shocked if Fed doesn’t win: it takes a lot to beat seven of the world’s best players right in a row.  But Nadal would need three consecutive Grand Slams to equal Fed’s record, and I don’t bury the champion lightly.  Federer is classier, smarter, and above all, better.  I’ll bet on that over a flash in the clay.