Dantrums

My friends, we must pause to reflect on the passing of Roger Federer from the 2008 Australian Open. For having lost to Novak Djokovic in the semifinals, Federer's streak of reaching ten consecutive Grand Slam finals is over. To those who don't follow tennis--- please know that I pray for you nightly--- ten finals in a row might seem merely impressive, when in fact until yesterday it was the greatest ongoing record in professional sports.  Just to put it in perspective: The previous record of consecutive Grand Slam finals reached is four, accomplished by the great Rod Laver, the only man to win all four in one year. Sampras once made three consecutive finals, as did Jimmy Connors.  Federer has broken the old record two and a half times over.  People like to compare Roger with Tiger Woods; both are dominant in their respective sports, but Tiger's record for making the top two in consecutive majors is only four times. Federer hasn't missed a final since the 2005 French, where he was beaten in the semis by Nadal, perhaps the best clay court player ever.  Of the ten finals he played he lost only two, both to Nadal at the French. Without Nadal in the way Fed probably wins both of those tournaments. The mere fact that Federer and Nadal play tennis concurrently can be considered nothing less than a miracle. Without Nadal, Fed might have won ten Slams in a row.  Such a feat is inconceivable; athletic excellence like that is an affront to God.  And so he has sent Nadal. Or Djokovic.  Or perhaps Satan sent them.  However you want to look at it, ten Slam finals in a row will never happen again.  This is not the end of Fed's dominance.  He probably has five to ten more Slams left in him.  But the greatest streak in modern sports is now history. Luckily there is another for us to follow, even if it doesn't have the same ring to it--- 15 straight Grand Slam semifinals and counting.   

                                 

Meanwhile, on the other side of the men's draw, more history is being made, this time at Nadal's expense.  The 38th ranked Jo-Wilfried Tsonga dismantled him 6-2, 6-3, 6-2, Nadal's worst loss in a Grand Slam, and Tsonga won because of his deadly net game.  The net is alien territory to most of today's players, and one of the reasons Nadal couldn't handle it was because nobody plays like this anymore.  What's especially amazing is Tsonga's instinct for which exact shot to approach on. Nadal also has the best passing game in tennis-- usually when opponents come to net they are putty in his hands. Tsonga is a big guy, and at 6'2, 200 lbs., he doesn't look all that fast, but he is one gymnastic bear.  One time Nadal tried to pass him with a nasty topspin forehand down the line--- a winner against any other player--- and Tsonga, from the center of the net, leapt to his left, stretched his arms and delivered a slice backhand with so much spin it landed on Nadal's side of the court and flipped backwards into the net.  Point Tsonga.  His forehand is no slouch either; it rivals James Blake's in power.  Tsonga hit winners from every part of the court, while Nadal, the fastest guy in the game, watched balls blow by him with cruel regularity.  

Tsonga is on fire in this tournament, but he is so bloody talented I would be shocked if he weren't in the Top 20 to stay. It's an even bigger coming out party than Baghdatis' two years ago because Baghdatis was an escape artist.  He almost enjoyed being down in matches.  Tsonga is a destructor. Seriously the way he played against Nadal, I think if he played at that level against Federer, he still would have won. I mean, Djokovic's win over Federer was very impressive.  What Tsonga did to Nadal was superhuman. Watching this year's Aussie Open has put me into a permanent state of shock.  I can't feel my extremities and continually wet my pants.