Winners or Entertainers ?

Today, as I was having lunch at the school cafeteria, I heard a group of 3-4 students talking about lawn tennis. Back home, I used to watch this sport quite often, specially the Grand Slams, but here, I don't get a chance of watching them. Even if I would have got the scope, I doubt of utilising it.

They were talking about Roger Federer and arguing about the fact that who in the tennis world can beat him. Only one name came into picture, that of Rafael Nadal, who is unanimously accepted as the "king of clay" in the modern tennis arena. But he can only beat Federer in a clay court, whereas in all the other surfaces, Federer is practically unbeatable. His records speak for him. Federer has been winning the Wimbledon title for the last four years, the US open for the last 3 years, and the Australian Open thrice in the last four occassions. But he is yet to capture the French Open, where he has been beaten by Rafael Nadal three times in succession : in semi-finals in 2005, and in the finals of 2006 and 2007.

Isn't modern tennis getting too predictable? The three Grand Slams, barring the Rolland Garros, are being won by Roger, while the French Open by Nadal. This is the scenario for the last 3 years! Isn't that too long??

It is not Federer's fault that his opponents fail to beat him in most of the cases, but thinking in terms of a viewer, there has been very little twist in the tennis world for the last 3 years. When you can predict the results of all the major tournaments of the year beforehand and there is a very sleak chance that you'll go wrong, will you not lose interest in the game? While watching a tennis game featuring Federer or Nadal, it seems to me that the surface is being occupied by a robot, whose every movement is calculated, every nanosecond is syncronised to perfection, and the player can never make a mistake.


I agree to the fact that in a game , winning is vital. But winning is not the only thing people like to see. I still remember the matches between Boris Becker and Stefan Edberg, Boris Becker and Andre Agassi and a few other true artists in the tennis court. I had always been a fan of Becker since childhood, its not that he used to win everytime, on the contrary his form used to go up and down very frequently. The same is true for Andre Agassi as well. They were the true entertainers who used to play the game only by sheer joy of the game itself. The results did not always reflect their class or style, nor they themselves were too much bothered about it.

That is the reason why we like Brian Lara more than Ricky Ponting, Viv Richards more than Sachin Tendulkar or Andre Agassi and Boris Becker more than Roger Federer and Rafael Nadal. Whenever the first group has played, they have added something to the game and have entertained the crowd to the hilt. People have always loved the game due to the presence of these personalities. In their absence, the game still continues, but loses much of its warmth, charm and beauty.