Congratulations to Roger Federer, who won his 9th major title, today, defeating Andy Roddick 6-2, 4-6, 7-5, 6-1. I was hoping Roddick would pull through, but it didn't happen. After the first set, I thought Roddick was done. Second set, Roddick stepped up, and I was hopeful for an upset. Third set, 3-3, Roddick had 3 break points at love-40, but Federer pulled it out and eventually won the set. After that, Roddick was really done.
What I want to see is someone able to force Federer to play his best tennis for the entire match. Nadal is capable of this on clay, but I'd like someone--anyone--to be able to do the same on grass and hard courts.
Anywhoo, Federer only needs to win six more to beat Pete Sampras' record of 14 major singles titles. That's still quite a few more to go, but Federer has reached the finals of the past six majors--this year winning them all except for the French Open. At only 25 years of age, Federer has plenty of time to claim this record all for his own.
One of the major things ;o) that really annoys me about tennis reporting is how they've started calling the Australian Open, French Open, Wimbledon, and the U.S. Open "Grand Slams". I find that very disconcerting. I've always thought of a "Grand Slam" as winning all four major events in the same calendar year. These days, however, I read/hear writers and reporters saying "Sharapova has won her second grand slam" or "Roger Federer has won his ninth grand slam title". Eh? When did they change majors into grand slams? Why did they change majors into grand slams? Confuuuuusing.
No comments:
Post a Comment